Linky
Muslim Woman Cannot Wear Veil In License Photo
POSTED: 6:43 a.m. EDT June 6, 2003
UPDATED: 7:44 p.m. EDT June 6, 2003
ORLANDO, Fla. -- A judge ruled Friday that a Muslim woman cannot wear a veil in her driver's license photo, agreeing with the state that allowing people to show only their eyes would undermine efforts to stop terrorists.
Circuit Judge Janet C. Thorpe agreed with the state's assertion that if Sultaana Freeman could keep her face off her driver's license, so could others planning harm.
Freeman had said it is against her religious beliefs to show her face in public, but Thorpe ruled her right to free exercise of religion would not be burdened by the photo requirement.
The state "has a compelling interest in protecting the public from criminal activities and security threats, and that having access to photo image identification is essential to promote that interest," wrote Thorpe, who heard three days of testimony last week.
Florida Attorney General Charlie Crist praised the decision, saying "Nothing is more important than making sure that our people are safe."
Freeman refused to speak with the media after meeting with her attorney, but her husband said they would continue to fight the state's policy.
"She's not lifting the veil," Abdul-Maalik Freeman said. "This is a religious principle, this is a principle that's imbedded is us as believers. So, she's not going to do that.
"We'll take the next step, and this is what we call the American Way."
Attorney Howard Marks said the ruling would be appealed.
"It's really a sad day for Americans," Marks said. "Hopefull, we'll look back at decisions like this in the future and realize this was a mistake."
The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, which has been supporting Freeman's fight, said the ruling "is a needless restriction on religious freedom with no benefit to public safety."
"We're concerned because the government's tendency in the aftermath of September 11th has been to restrict numerous freedoms merely for the sake of restricting liberty, rather than to make us truly safer," said Howard Simon, ACLU of Florida's executive director.
"Today's ruling runs counter to the most basic principles of religious freedom that give everyone -- including members of minority religious communities as well as majority Christian faiths -- the right to practice and worship as they choose."
The ACLU noted that a driver's license can be obtained without a photo in 14 states.
Freeman, 35, had sued Florida after the state revoked her license in 2001 when she refused to have her photo retaken with her face uncovered, saying it violated her religious beliefs. Her previous license showed her veiled with only her eyes visible.
The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles had offered Freeman an alternative -- lifting her veil in a private room in front of a female worker -- and Thorpe's ruling stated that proposal would not have caused harm.
"We tried to be as accommodating as we can while still following the law, which is very clear," department spokesman Bob Sanchez said. "I think the judge has recognized that the law is not only clear but pretty reasonable."
Freeman, a convert to Islam previously known as Sandra Kellar, wore her veil for the photo on the Florida driver's license she obtained after moving to the state in 2001.
Nine months later, after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, she received a letter from the state warning that it would revoke her license unless she returned for a photo with her face uncovered.
Freeman claims her religious beliefs require her to keep her head and face covered out of modesty and that her faith prohibits her face from being photographed.
Her lawyers argued that instead of a driver's license photo, she could use other documents such as a birth certificate or Social Security card to prove her identity if necessary.
But a state attorney countered that Islamic law has exceptions that allow women to lift their veil and expose their face if the action serves a public good. Assistant Attorney General Jason Vail said arrangements can be made to have Freeman photographed only with women present to allay her concerns about modesty.
Thorpe, in her ruling, noted that Freeman "has been willing to have her picture taken many times, albeit veiled, and eyes are facial characteristics of living beings."
The judge also pointed out that Freeman's husband testified that he shares his wife's beliefs -- but he never objected to being photographed for his own driver's licenses or throughout the televised trial.
During the hearing, Freeman conceded that she has had her face photographed without a veil since she started wearing one in 1997. She had a mug shot (photo left) taken after her arrest in 1998 on a domestic battery charge involving one of twin 3-year-old sisters who were in her foster care. The children were removed from her home, according to records from the Decatur (Ill.) Police Services.
Child welfare workers told investigators in Decatur that Freeman and her husband had used their concerns about religious modesty to hinder them from looking for bruises on the girls, according to the Decatur Police records.
Thorpe didn't allow much of the facts about Freeman's arrest into evidence.
____________________________________________________
Ok this top I don't know which side to pick....one side of me says hey we should respect other peoples beliefs...but the other side of me says this is america...freedom costs something.........what do you think?