Why the BOP May Restrict The 48 Laws of Power

Robert Greene’s The 48 Laws of Power is a book about influence: how people acquire it, defend it and use it in relationships. For someone reading at home, its lessons may seem like advice about work or human nature. Inside a federal prison, officials may view the same lessons through a different lens. They must consider whether a book could be used to intimidate others, encourage disruptive behavior or make criminal activity easier.

That concern is the basis on which a federal prison could reject a copy of Greene’s book. The Bureau of Prisons (BOP) allows incarcerated people to receive publications without prior approval, but its policy permits a warden to reject a book if it threatens an institution’s security, good order or discipline, or might facilitate criminal activity. The policy also identifies material that encourages violence, group disruption or crime as grounds for rejection.

Greene’s writing invites scrutiny because it describes power as something a person can pursue deliberately. In a prison, where people live in close quarters and conflicts can spread, officials might worry that a reader could use its ideas to manipulate another person, build influence within a group or conceal harmful intentions. Those are possible reasons for a restriction under BOP policy, rather than a verified account of why a particular federal warden rejected this title.

The concern is not unique to federal prisons. PEN America found The 48 Laws of Power on prison ban lists in 18 states. It also documented a Washington state rejection of another Greene book, The 50th Law. In that case, officials specifically raised concerns about techniques for manipulating and deceiving people. The state example offers insight into how corrections officials may interpret Greene’s work, although it cannot stand in for the reasoning behind an individual BOP decision.

There is another way to read the book. A person who understands manipulation may be better able to recognize it and resist it. Greene told PEN America that some incarcerated readers said his work helped them pause and reflect instead of reacting emotionally to prison life. A book’s subject alone does not establish how every reader will use it.

The BOP’s rules reflect that distinction. A warden cannot reject a publication simply because its ideas are unpopular or offensive, and cannot keep a standing list of excluded titles. The warden must review the publication and, if rejecting it, give the incarcerated person written reasons identifying the objectionable material. The person then has an opportunity to appeal.

The 48 Laws of Power may therefore continue to face restrictions at federal facilities when wardens conclude that specific content poses a security risk. What the public record does not establish is a nationwide BOP ban or a single official BOP reason for every past rejection. The central question in each case is what threat the warden identified—and whether the written decision supports it.