Whether the Fourth Circuit erred in applying Turner v. Safley balancing test to a First Amendment overbreadth challenge involving prison regulation of inmate correspondence

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Fourth Circuit erred by holding, in conflict with this Court’s decision in United States v. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460 (2010), that a prison regulation was not overbroad because facially expansive terms could be narrowed by reference to “context.” 2. Whether the Fourth Circuit erred by holding, in conflict with other Circuits, that prison regulation of outbound inmate correspondence is governed by the extremely deferential balancing test of Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987), rather than the more speech-protective standard this Court adopted in Procunier v. Martinez, 416 U.S. 396 (1974). 3. Whether the Fourth Circuit erred by applying Turner balancing to a First Amendment overbreadth claim. 1