Muslim files lawsuit against Dearborn Heights for making her remove headscarf

[irosie91]

Because, you know, Muslims have every intention of assimilating into America, it's laws culture and traditions.

Muslim woman says police made her remove Islamic scarf

A Muslim woman filed a lawsuit Thursday accusing Dearborn Heights police of violating her constitutional rights by making her remove her Islamic headscarf after they arrested her for driving on a suspended license.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Detroit, asks for Dearborn Heights to “modify its current policy” so that Muslim women can wear Islamic headscarves during booking procedures.

Malak Kazan of Dearborn Heights was pulled over by police in July on a traffic violation and then taken into custody on a traffic misdemeanor because of her suspended license, according to the lawsuit. The male police officer then asked Kazan to remove her headscarf to take her booking photo, which usually requires no head coverings or hats.

Kazan objected, saying her Islamic faith required her to cover her hair and neck in the presence of men who are not part of her immediate family, the lawsuit said.

For Kazan, “wearing a headscarf is a reminder of her faith, the importance of modesty in her religion ... as well as a symbol of her own control over who may see the more intimate parts of her body,” the lawsuit said. “To have her hair and neck uncovered in public ... is ... deeply humiliating, violating, and defiling experience.”

Kazan said she asked to have a female officer take her photo, which he refused to do, said the lawsuit. The officer talked to a supervisor, who told him to proceed as usual.

The lawsuit says that wearing hijab is rooted in Islam, “based on...the Koran, the primary holy book of the Muslim religion; the hadith, oral traditions coming from the era of the Prophet Mohamed. ... The word hijab comes from the Arabic word ‘hajaba,’ which means to hide or screen from view or to cover.”

The lawsuit was filed against the city of Dearborn Heights, its police department and police chief, saying that Kazan’s constitutional rights to free expression of religion were violated. It claims the First, Fourth and 14th amendments were violated.

MORE: A Muslim woman sues Dearborn Heights police for removing her Islamic headscarf after arrest

Anyone can sue. Winning is a totally different thing. I predict she loses....and has to pay court costs. Bummer.

She'll lose because covering is a cult

Yes, how dare they follow their faith! Silly Muslims, don't you know America is for Christians?

Actually, it isn't their faith. Covering varies from culture to culture. It is a cultural thing. It is not specifically called for in the Koran. Only to dress modestly is called for in the Koran.

Arabian "culture" moves along with islam. Try to avoid the standard "its not in the Koran so it does not exist" BS. It
gives you away-----you have been primed by islamo-Nazi
propaganda to the point of SAME LINGO. Black Burkahs
did not originate in the Indian subcontinent

Sorry, but you are just fucking ignorant. The vast majority of Muslims on the planet do not live in Arabia. As well, in each country in the Arabian Gulf, the culture about covering varies. It varies within the culture too. It is based on the individual's and the family's values: IT IS NOT REQUIRED IN THE KORAN. The Koran only directs to dress modestly. In a country like the UAE, for example, the way Muslim women dress varies from high heels, nylons, and a dress suit to jeans and a t-shirt, to partial cover to full cover. It depends on the woman and her family, not on any law coming from the government or the Koran. Muslim women there are not required to cover. Many dress exactly like Westerners, perhaps a bit more modestly.

And as I said, the entire population of the Arabian Gulf is miniscule compared to the entire population of 1.7 billion Muslims around the world. Most Muslims do not live in Arabia.

I haven't been primed by anything you fucking moron. I know about this because I've been to those countries, because I've spent time in the Gulf and because I have worked closely with Muslim women in the Gulf and outside the Gulf. You are the ignorant one.

wrong again----you know nothing about islam and its history other than that which muslims TOLD YOU. I know what they told you because they told me the same thing. You are very much like them----that is why you fart out "FUCKING MORON" so easily. You worked with muslim women and you got your information FROM THEM. I worked with the most highly educated muslims ------people in those countries
consider doctors the MOST INTELLIGENT. I will say this about doctors------they know the EXPECTED answers----in order to get into medical school-----one has to have
ALL A's on the report card. Thus I have my education in islam from the people who KNOW THE ANSWERS in Islamic lands. ------thus I know what you think you know---what they told you.

getting back to Arabia ----you fucking moron----Arabia was where islam developed------it was then spread by force to other places which then became ARABIZED. The black burkah was not invented in what is today PAKISTAN---you fucking moron. Because I am not stupid as are you----I did not imagine that I KNOW ISLAM by reading the Koran.
In fact most of shariah law is not IN THE KORAN--shariah law has been developed------BY ARABS arabs are called arabs not because they were born in Arabia----it is because they Arabized people. Arabic did not develope in Egypt---you fucking moron------gee you are dim. Even Pakistanis are----"Arabized"------generally they do not know a word
of Arabic but they DO ARAB CRAP -------including arab dress

 

[Yurt]

Yes, how dare they follow their faith! Silly Muslims, don't you know America is for Christians?

for a booking for photo? you're an idiot

 

[Yurt]

Why does the right hate the Constitution?

what? you don't have a constitutional right to cover up in a booking photo you idiot troll.

 

[Yurt]

No one's stopping them from practicing their crazyass faith, but they should not expect special treatment when it comes to a situation like this.

Hey! Take that yarmulke off! And you over there -- that crucifix necklace has gotta go!
And you back there with the dot on your forehead, wipe it off! And don't let me see you Catholics out here on Ash Wednesday!

Any questions?

the yarmulke would come off doing booking, the rest doesn't conceal identity you tool

 

[Syriusly]

Because, you know, Muslims have every intention of assimilating into America, it's laws culture and traditions.

Muslim woman says police made her remove Islamic scarf

A Muslim woman filed a lawsuit Thursday accusing Dearborn Heights police of violating her constitutional rights by making her remove her Islamic headscarf after they arrested her for driving on a suspended license.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Detroit, asks for Dearborn Heights to “modify its current policy” so that Muslim women can wear Islamic headscarves during booking procedures.

Malak Kazan of Dearborn Heights was pulled over by police in July on a traffic violation and then taken into custody on a traffic misdemeanor because of her suspended license, according to the lawsuit. The male police officer then asked Kazan to remove her headscarf to take her booking photo, which usually requires no head coverings or hats.

Kazan objected, saying her Islamic faith required her to cover her hair and neck in the presence of men who are not part of her immediate family, the lawsuit said.

For Kazan, “wearing a headscarf is a reminder of her faith, the importance of modesty in her religion ... as well as a symbol of her own control over who may see the more intimate parts of her body,” the lawsuit said. “To have her hair and neck uncovered in public ... is ... deeply humiliating, violating, and defiling experience.”

Kazan said she asked to have a female officer take her photo, which he refused to do, said the lawsuit. The officer talked to a supervisor, who told him to proceed as usual.

The lawsuit says that wearing hijab is rooted in Islam, “based on...the Koran, the primary holy book of the Muslim religion; the hadith, oral traditions coming from the era of the Prophet Mohamed. ... The word hijab comes from the Arabic word ‘hajaba,’ which means to hide or screen from view or to cover.”

The lawsuit was filed against the city of Dearborn Heights, its police department and police chief, saying that Kazan’s constitutional rights to free expression of religion were violated. It claims the First, Fourth and 14th amendments were violated.

MORE: A Muslim woman sues Dearborn Heights police for removing her Islamic headscarf after arrest

Because of course this is only a "Muslim" issue.....

The Metropolitan Police Committee on Fiscal Affairs is scheduled to approve a $350,000 payment next week for Detective Steve Riback, an observant Orthodox Jew who claimed he was experiencing religious discrimination on the job.

"We believe that it is a fair settlement, and we hope that Fiscal Affairs will approve it," said attorney Craig Anderson, who represents the Metropolitan Police Department.

Anderson wouldn't comment further.

In a federal lawsuit filed in August 2007, Riback sought an injunction to prohibit police officials from disciplining him for wearing either a short beard or yarmulke at work. A yarmulke is a skullcap worn by Jewish men and boys.

Apples and oranges.
This is not a workplace issue. This is about allowing the authorities to photograph a person for reasons of indentification.

You clearly missed my point- you claimed that this was a Muslim issue with assimulation- I pointed out that this is a very American issue with several cultures- including Orthodox Jews who feel it is their religious duty to wear certain garb.

But I agree with the police- the woman needed to remove her face covering in order to be photographed- identification/safety issues over-ride religious freedom claims. No matter what your religious convictions, you have to comply with safety concerns.

 

[Syriusly]

Because, you know, Muslims have every intention of assimilating into America, it's laws culture and traditions.

Muslim woman says police made her remove Islamic scarf

A Muslim woman filed a lawsuit Thursday accusing Dearborn Heights police of violating her constitutional rights by making her remove her Islamic headscarf after they arrested her for driving on a suspended license.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Detroit, asks for Dearborn Heights to “modify its current policy” so that Muslim women can wear Islamic headscarves during booking procedures.

Malak Kazan of Dearborn Heights was pulled over by police in July on a traffic violation and then taken into custody on a traffic misdemeanor because of her suspended license, according to the lawsuit. The male police officer then asked Kazan to remove her headscarf to take her booking photo, which usually requires no head coverings or hats.

Kazan objected, saying her Islamic faith required her to cover her hair and neck in the presence of men who are not part of her immediate family, the lawsuit said.

For Kazan, “wearing a headscarf is a reminder of her faith, the importance of modesty in her religion ... as well as a symbol of her own control over who may see the more intimate parts of her body,” the lawsuit said. “To have her hair and neck uncovered in public ... is ... deeply humiliating, violating, and defiling experience.”

Kazan said she asked to have a female officer take her photo, which he refused to do, said the lawsuit. The officer talked to a supervisor, who told him to proceed as usual.

The lawsuit says that wearing hijab is rooted in Islam, “based on...the Koran, the primary holy book of the Muslim religion; the hadith, oral traditions coming from the era of the Prophet Mohamed. ... The word hijab comes from the Arabic word ‘hajaba,’ which means to hide or screen from view or to cover.”

The lawsuit was filed against the city of Dearborn Heights, its police department and police chief, saying that Kazan’s constitutional rights to free expression of religion were violated. It claims the First, Fourth and 14th amendments were violated.

MORE: A Muslim woman sues Dearborn Heights police for removing her Islamic headscarf after arrest

Anyone can sue. Winning is a totally different thing. I predict she loses....and has to pay court costs. Bummer.

She'll lose because covering is a cult

Yes, how dare they follow their faith! Silly Muslims, don't you know America is for Christians?

Actually, it isn't their faith. Covering varies from culture to culture. It is a cultural thing. It is not specifically called for in the Koran. Only to dress modestly is called for in the Koran.

Arabian "culture" moves along with islam. Try to avoid the standard "its not in the Koran so it does not exist" BS. It
gives you away-----you have been primed by islamo-Nazi
propaganda to the point of SAME LINGO. Black Burkahs
did not originate in the Indian subcontinent

Sorry, but you are just fucking ignorant. The vast majority of Muslims on the planet do not live in Arabia. As well, in each country in the Arabian Gulf, the culture about covering varies. It varies within the culture too. It is based on the individual's and the family's values: IT IS NOT REQUIRED IN THE KORAN. The Koran only directs to dress modestly. In a country like the UAE, for example, the way Muslim women dress varies from high heels, nylons, and a dress suit to jeans and a t-shirt, to partial cover to full cover. It depends on the woman and her family, not on any law coming from the government or the Koran. Muslim women there are not required to cover. Many dress exactly like Westerners, perhaps a bit more modestly.

And as I said, the entire population of the Arabian Gulf is miniscule compared to the entire population of 1.7 billion Muslims around the world. Most Muslims do not live in Arabia.

I haven't been primed by anything you fucking moron. I know about this because I've been to those countries, because I've spent time in the Gulf and because I have worked closely with Muslim women in the Gulf and outside the Gulf. You are the ignorant one.

wrong again----you know nothing about islam and its history other than that which muslims TOLD YOU. I know what they told you because they told me the same thing. You are very much like them----that is why you fart out "FUCKING MORON" so easily. You worked with muslim women and you got your information FROM THEM. I worked with the most highly educated muslims ------people in those countries
consider doctors the MOST INTELLIGENT. I will say this about doctors------they know the EXPECTED answers----in order to get into medical school-----one has to have
ALL A's on the report card. Thus I have my education in islam from the people who KNOW THE ANSWERS in Islamic lands. ------thus I know what you think you know---what they told you.
Fun to watch the progs defend the death cult that is islam while looking away from over 50,000,000 abortions.

Amusing to watch Conservative wingnuts bring up strawman of abortions in every thread......

 

[dannyboys]

Hey! Take that yarmulke off! And you over there -- that crucifix necklace has gotta go!
And you back there with the dot on your forehead, wipe it off! And don't let me see you Catholics out here on Ash Wednesday!

Any questions?

I have a question. How many of those items you mentioned obscure the identity of the individual or make visually identifying them more difficult?

The concept of a mug shot is as an identifying document. Therefore anything that obscures the face is not allowed. If they're really that concerned stay at home where they belong and they won't have to deal with the police.

All Pogo knows is that the prime directive demands that there is one special group of people who absolutely MUST be protected, and so any rationalizations that result stem from this notion. Instead of developing arguments from the ground up, they are retrofitted from the end result on back. When one argument is defeated, simply shift to another.

There is a large portion of the left that has long since abandoned anything approaching liberal ideology, and now simply plays the game of identity politics. What matters to them ISN'T a principle or ideal, but merely the identity of the person involved. If that identity is Muslim, it gets moved right to the front of the line.

If this were a case of a militant Christian instead of Militant Muslim, the very people who are defending would be on it like shit on stink. You know it. They know it. Everybody knows it, but it's all so very wink wink because they cannot possibly acknowledge it. Like Pavlov's pooch,the process is just too ingrained.

Except what you continue to miss here is that, if we go by the article (and the OP is clearly not reliable, so we have to), this is not a religion issue. It's a gender issue.

Why didn't the cops simply provide a female officer per her request?

B/c they are not required to ass hole.
So in your fuck-witt world a 'tranny' could be arrested and insist a 'tranny'.....like Julia Roberts, only take the tranny's mug shot? You really are fucked in the head.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Except what you continue to miss here is that, if we go by the article (and the OP is clearly not reliable, so we have to), this is not a religion issue. It's a gender issue.

Why didn't the cops simply provide a female officer per her request?

You sure do keep moving the goalposts, don't you?

What you are missing is that this is just an obvious attempt by Islamists to move this country more towards that spot they have already moved Britain by eroding an essential liberal principle when it comes to the separation of Church and state.

Why do you hate liberalism so much that you support its antithesis so thoroughly?

 

[Yurt]

Hey! Take that yarmulke off! And you over there -- that crucifix necklace has gotta go!
And you back there with the dot on your forehead, wipe it off! And don't let me see you Catholics out here on Ash Wednesday!

Any questions?

I have a question. How many of those items you mentioned obscure the identity of the individual or make visually identifying them more difficult?

The concept of a mug shot is as an identifying document. Therefore anything that obscures the face is not allowed. If they're really that concerned stay at home where they belong and they won't have to deal with the police.

All Pogo knows is that the prime directive demands that there is one special group of people who absolutely MUST be protected, and so any rationalizations that result stem from this notion. Instead of developing arguments from the ground up, they are retrofitted from the end result on back. When one argument is defeated, simply shift to another.

There is a large portion of the left that has long since abandoned anything approaching liberal ideology, and now simply plays the game of identity politics. What matters to them ISN'T a principle or ideal, but merely the identity of the person involved. If that identity is Muslim, it gets moved right to the front of the line.

If this were a case of a militant Christian instead of Militant Muslim, the very people who are defending would be on it like shit on stink. You know it. They know it. Everybody knows it, but it's all so very wink wink because they cannot possibly acknowledge it. Like Pavlov's pooch,the process is just too ingrained.

Except what you continue to miss here is that, if we go by the article (and the OP is clearly not reliable, so we have to), this is not a religion issue. It's a gender issue.

Why didn't the cops simply provide a female officer per her request?

you're ignorant. men would still see the photo....

 

[Pogo]

Hey! Take that yarmulke off! And you over there -- that crucifix necklace has gotta go!
And you back there with the dot on your forehead, wipe it off! And don't let me see you Catholics out here on Ash Wednesday!

Any questions?

I have a question. How many of those items you mentioned obscure the identity of the individual or make visually identifying them more difficult?

The concept of a mug shot is as an identifying document. Therefore anything that obscures the face is not allowed. If they're really that concerned stay at home where they belong and they won't have to deal with the police.

All Pogo knows is that the prime directive demands that there is one special group of people who absolutely MUST be protected, and so any rationalizations that result stem from this notion. Instead of developing arguments from the ground up, they are retrofitted from the end result on back. When one argument is defeated, simply shift to another.

There is a large portion of the left that has long since abandoned anything approaching liberal ideology, and now simply plays the game of identity politics. What matters to them ISN'T a principle or ideal, but merely the identity of the person involved. If that identity is Muslim, it gets moved right to the front of the line.

If this were a case of a militant Christian instead of Militant Muslim, the very people who are defending would be on it like shit on stink. You know it. They know it. Everybody knows it, but it's all so very wink wink because they cannot possibly acknowledge it. Like Pavlov's pooch,the process is just too ingrained.

Except what you continue to miss here is that, if we go by the article (and the OP is clearly not reliable, so we have to), this is not a religion issue. It's a gender issue.

Why didn't the cops simply provide a female officer per her request?

B/c they are not required to ass hole.
So in your fuck-witt world a 'tranny' could be arrested and insist a 'tranny'.....like Julia Roberts, only take the tranny's mug shot? You really are fucked in the head.

Yyyyyyyyyyeah... that's the same thing.

Do you drink canned heat?

 

[Pogo]

Except what you continue to miss here is that, if we go by the article (and the OP is clearly not reliable, so we have to), this is not a religion issue. It's a gender issue.

Why didn't the cops simply provide a female officer per her request?

You sure do keep moving the goalposts, don't you?

What you are missing is that this is just an obvious attempt by Islamists to move this country more towards that spot they have already moved Britain by eroding an essential liberal principle when it comes to the separation of Church and state.

Why do you hate liberalism so much that you support its antithesis so thoroughly?

There's no "moving goalposts" on my part. I quoted the article.
I asked above, what if the police insisted on strip-searching her? By a male officer?

You on the other hand danced around the question without addressing it -- why didn't they have a female officer take the shot as requested? Don't they normally supply a female officer for a female search, for the same reason?

I know, I know what you're gonna say..... "but... but... Moooooooooooooslims!"

 

[Coyote]

Because, you know, Muslims have every intention of assimilating into America, it's laws culture and traditions.

Muslim woman says police made her remove Islamic scarf

A Muslim woman filed a lawsuit Thursday accusing Dearborn Heights police of violating her constitutional rights by making her remove her Islamic headscarf after they arrested her for driving on a suspended license.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Detroit, asks for Dearborn Heights to “modify its current policy” so that Muslim women can wear Islamic headscarves during booking procedures.

Malak Kazan of Dearborn Heights was pulled over by police in July on a traffic violation and then taken into custody on a traffic misdemeanor because of her suspended license, according to the lawsuit. The male police officer then asked Kazan to remove her headscarf to take her booking photo, which usually requires no head coverings or hats.

Kazan objected, saying her Islamic faith required her to cover her hair and neck in the presence of men who are not part of her immediate family, the lawsuit said.

For Kazan, “wearing a headscarf is a reminder of her faith, the importance of modesty in her religion ... as well as a symbol of her own control over who may see the more intimate parts of her body,” the lawsuit said. “To have her hair and neck uncovered in public ... is ... deeply humiliating, violating, and defiling experience.”

Kazan said she asked to have a female officer take her photo, which he refused to do, said the lawsuit. The officer talked to a supervisor, who told him to proceed as usual.

The lawsuit says that wearing hijab is rooted in Islam, “based on...the Koran, the primary holy book of the Muslim religion; the hadith, oral traditions coming from the era of the Prophet Mohamed. ... The word hijab comes from the Arabic word ‘hajaba,’ which means to hide or screen from view or to cover.”

The lawsuit was filed against the city of Dearborn Heights, its police department and police chief, saying that Kazan’s constitutional rights to free expression of religion were violated. It claims the First, Fourth and 14th amendments were violated.

MORE: A Muslim woman sues Dearborn Heights police for removing her Islamic headscarf after arrest

I remember a lawsuit - possibly Florida - in which a Muslim woman tried to sue for being forced to take off her veil for a drivers license photograph. She didn't win that case.

I remember that case, but not the outcome.

She lost.

It makes sense - you have to have an ID photo that's...an ID. But there's nothing wrong with a woman requesting a female officer to take the photo. When certain things, like body searches are done - a female officer is usually selected to do it on women.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Yes, how dare they follow their faith! Silly Muslims, don't you know America is for Christians?

They aren't going to let you keep a Crucifix either...
But you knew that.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Police protocol was reasonable as well as compelling restraint on her religious freedom. Jails and prisons require LDS members to refrain from wearing temple garments while incarcerated.

Grow up, gang. It's just a thang.

 

[Coyote]

Why does the right hate the Constitution?

If indeed this violates the Constitution, then I've got no problem with her lawsuit.
The main problem I have is that it's just more evidence that immigrating Muslims do not intend to abide by the laws, customs, regulations, etc., of America.
They want us to bend our rules to their liking.

This isn't unique to Islam. Orthodox Jewish women have similar religous requirements for modesty as do groups like the Amish and Mennonites where women where caps. What's wrong with allowing it? I agree that an ID photo must be clear, but other than that I don't understand the uproar.

In fact, Orthodox Jewish women face similar harrassment over it and stand with Muslim women on their rights to be able to wear a scarf in accordance with their religious beliefs.

 

[Yurt]

Because, you know, Muslims have every intention of assimilating into America, it's laws culture and traditions.

Muslim woman says police made her remove Islamic scarf

A Muslim woman filed a lawsuit Thursday accusing Dearborn Heights police of violating her constitutional rights by making her remove her Islamic headscarf after they arrested her for driving on a suspended license.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Detroit, asks for Dearborn Heights to “modify its current policy” so that Muslim women can wear Islamic headscarves during booking procedures.

Malak Kazan of Dearborn Heights was pulled over by police in July on a traffic violation and then taken into custody on a traffic misdemeanor because of her suspended license, according to the lawsuit. The male police officer then asked Kazan to remove her headscarf to take her booking photo, which usually requires no head coverings or hats.

Kazan objected, saying her Islamic faith required her to cover her hair and neck in the presence of men who are not part of her immediate family, the lawsuit said.

For Kazan, “wearing a headscarf is a reminder of her faith, the importance of modesty in her religion ... as well as a symbol of her own control over who may see the more intimate parts of her body,” the lawsuit said. “To have her hair and neck uncovered in public ... is ... deeply humiliating, violating, and defiling experience.”

Kazan said she asked to have a female officer take her photo, which he refused to do, said the lawsuit. The officer talked to a supervisor, who told him to proceed as usual.

The lawsuit says that wearing hijab is rooted in Islam, “based on...the Koran, the primary holy book of the Muslim religion; the hadith, oral traditions coming from the era of the Prophet Mohamed. ... The word hijab comes from the Arabic word ‘hajaba,’ which means to hide or screen from view or to cover.”

The lawsuit was filed against the city of Dearborn Heights, its police department and police chief, saying that Kazan’s constitutional rights to free expression of religion were violated. It claims the First, Fourth and 14th amendments were violated.

MORE: A Muslim woman sues Dearborn Heights police for removing her Islamic headscarf after arrest

I remember a lawsuit - possibly Florida - in which a Muslim woman tried to sue for being forced to take off her veil for a drivers license photograph. She didn't win that case.

I remember that case, but not the outcome.

She lost.

It makes sense - you have to have an ID photo that's...an ID. But there's nothing wrong with a woman requesting a female officer to take the photo. When certain things, like body searches are done - a female officer is usually selected to do it on women.

her only concern was that a male was taking the photo? if that is the case, then i was wrong, a female officer can take the photo like female officers can do a strip search.

 

[Coyote]

Because, you know, Muslims have every intention of assimilating into America, it's laws culture and traditions.

Muslim woman says police made her remove Islamic scarf



MORE: A Muslim woman sues Dearborn Heights police for removing her Islamic headscarf after arrest

I remember a lawsuit - possibly Florida - in which a Muslim woman tried to sue for being forced to take off her veil for a drivers license photograph. She didn't win that case.

I remember that case, but not the outcome.

She lost.

It makes sense - you have to have an ID photo that's...an ID. But there's nothing wrong with a woman requesting a female officer to take the photo. When certain things, like body searches are done - a female officer is usually selected to do it on women.

her only concern was that a male was taking the photo? if that is the case, then i was wrong, a female officer can take the photo like female officers can do a strip search.

I'm not sure - it's not clear in the article If it was about having an ID photo taken, then too bad. If it's taking off her scarf in front of men, then that's not to different than disrobing (from her point of view) and asking for a female officer is not unreasonable.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Because, you know, Muslims have every intention of assimilating into America, it's laws culture and traditions.

Muslim woman says police made her remove Islamic scarf

A Muslim woman filed a lawsuit Thursday accusing Dearborn Heights police of violating her constitutional rights by making her remove her Islamic headscarf after they arrested her for driving on a suspended license.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Detroit, asks for Dearborn Heights to “modify its current policy” so that Muslim women can wear Islamic headscarves during booking procedures.

Malak Kazan of Dearborn Heights was pulled over by police in July on a traffic violation and then taken into custody on a traffic misdemeanor because of her suspended license, according to the lawsuit. The male police officer then asked Kazan to remove her headscarf to take her booking photo, which usually requires no head coverings or hats.

Kazan objected, saying her Islamic faith required her to cover her hair and neck in the presence of men who are not part of her immediate family, the lawsuit said.

For Kazan, “wearing a headscarf is a reminder of her faith, the importance of modesty in her religion ... as well as a symbol of her own control over who may see the more intimate parts of her body,” the lawsuit said. “To have her hair and neck uncovered in public ... is ... deeply humiliating, violating, and defiling experience.”

Kazan said she asked to have a female officer take her photo, which he refused to do, said the lawsuit. The officer talked to a supervisor, who told him to proceed as usual.

The lawsuit says that wearing hijab is rooted in Islam, “based on...the Koran, the primary holy book of the Muslim religion; the hadith, oral traditions coming from the era of the Prophet Mohamed. ... The word hijab comes from the Arabic word ‘hajaba,’ which means to hide or screen from view or to cover.”

The lawsuit was filed against the city of Dearborn Heights, its police department and police chief, saying that Kazan’s constitutional rights to free expression of religion were violated. It claims the First, Fourth and 14th amendments were violated.

MORE: A Muslim woman sues Dearborn Heights police for removing her Islamic headscarf after arrest

I remember a lawsuit - possibly Florida - in which a Muslim woman tried to sue for being forced to take off her veil for a drivers license photograph. She didn't win that case.

I remember that case, but not the outcome.

She lost.

It makes sense - you have to have an ID photo that's...an ID. But there's nothing wrong with a woman requesting a female officer to take the photo. When certain things, like body searches are done - a female officer is usually selected to do it on women.

They can ask, but taking a picture and conducting a body search are two very different things. One does not invades ones personal space.

 

[Coyote]

Because, you know, Muslims have every intention of assimilating into America, it's laws culture and traditions.

Muslim woman says police made her remove Islamic scarf



MORE: A Muslim woman sues Dearborn Heights police for removing her Islamic headscarf after arrest

I remember a lawsuit - possibly Florida - in which a Muslim woman tried to sue for being forced to take off her veil for a drivers license photograph. She didn't win that case.

I remember that case, but not the outcome.

She lost.

It makes sense - you have to have an ID photo that's...an ID. But there's nothing wrong with a woman requesting a female officer to take the photo. When certain things, like body searches are done - a female officer is usually selected to do it on women.

They can ask, but taking a picture and conducting a body search are two very different things. One does not invades ones personal space.

"Personal space" depends on the person and the culture and if religious beliefs are involved they should be respected as much as possible without infringing on public safety or the requirements of law. An ID photo has to be an identifiable picture - no head gear etc. - but it doesn't have to be taken by a male officer.

 

[Yurt]

I remember a lawsuit - possibly Florida - in which a Muslim woman tried to sue for being forced to take off her veil for a drivers license photograph. She didn't win that case.

I remember that case, but not the outcome.

She lost.

It makes sense - you have to have an ID photo that's...an ID. But there's nothing wrong with a woman requesting a female officer to take the photo. When certain things, like body searches are done - a female officer is usually selected to do it on women.

her only concern was that a male was taking the photo? if that is the case, then i was wrong, a female officer can take the photo like female officers can do a strip search.

I'm not sure - it's not clear in the article If it was about having an ID photo taken, then too bad. If it's taking off her scarf in front of men, then that's not to different than disrobing (from her point of view) and asking for a female officer is not unreasonable.

i read it again, and it was just a booking photo and she did ask for a female to take the photo. if that is all her lawsuit is about, then i believe she will win as the state has no compelling interest to deny her request to have her photo taken by a female.