Wright v. Riveland, 219 F.3d 905 (9^th Cir. 2000)-Wright, and a class of other inmates, challenged a Washington statute that authorized a 35% deduction from all funds received by inmates from outside sources. Among other claims, the class asserted that the mandatory deductions from inmates' pension plan payments violated the anti-alienation provision of 29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(1). This court disagreed, and affirmed the judgment of the district court.

This court followed the lead of the Third and Tenth Circuits, which held that the anti-alienation provision prevents the giving of an interest in a plan benefit payment which "is, or may become, payable to the participant or beneficiary" and does not apply to benefits the plans have already distributed.  See Guidry v. Sheet Metal Workers Int'l Assoc., 10 F.3d 700 (10th Cir. 1993), aff'd in part on reh'g en banc, 39 F.3d 1078 (1994).  This court declined the appellants' request to follow the Fourth Circuit's United States v. Smith, 47 F.3d 681 (4th Cir. 1995), which relied on Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo, 439 U.S. 572 (1979), an opinion which found that the anti-alienation provisions in the Railroad Retirement Act protected a beneficiary's benefits.  This court found that the provisions in that statute were not substantially similar to those in ERISA, and were thus inapplicable.