Where do you draw the line with a hijab?
Let’s assume it wasn’t this severe.
But what if it was?

Woman sues, claims judge forced her to remove hijab – CNN.com Cripes. Here we go again with another rash of this crap.

A Muslim woman and the Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations sued a judge Wednesday for allegedly ordering the woman to remove her hijab, or religious head covering, in court.

Raneen Albaghdady, of Wayne County, Michigan, contends that Judge William Callahan told her to remove her hijab on June 16 when she was petitioning for a name change, according to the lawsuit, which was filed Wednesday in a U.S. district court in Michigan.

Wayne County is also listed as a defendant in the suit.




  1. bobbo, the Constitution is not a suicide pact says:

    On little facts, seems to me that “legally” the religious garb should be allowed.

    From a common sense/self protective/new law/law should be perspective==the freak should not be allowed into the country if she isn’t willing to melt.

  2. Jägermeister says:

    John… here’s a hijab… and here’s are some burka babes. Pedro, stop masturbating!

  3. Jägermeister says:

    here’s = here 😛

  4. Cap'nKangaroo says:

    “”In response to Judge Callahan’s direction, ‘No hats allowed in the courtroom,’ Ms. Albaghdady responded, “Okay, it doesn’t matter,’ and immediately removed her head covering, without protest or explanation,” the statement said.”

    Someone’s fishing for a judgment.

  5. bobbo, I could learn to be gentle from you says:

    #2–Nicely done Jag.

    I think you were right the first time with here is = here’s. You know how correct my grammar, punctuation, and spelling is.

  6. Jägermeister says:

    #5 – bobbo

    Our grammar is like Pedro at a right-wing meeting… it sucks… it’s not for nothing that his nickname is Hoover.

  7. Hugh Ripper says:

    Jag

    That hijab is rather fetching. I like.

    Its a bit of a stretch to class a hijab as a ‘hat’ and therefore disallow it in the courtroom.

  8. Mr. Fusion says:

    This is not the first time Court traditions have won out over religious practices. That doesn’t make it right, however the Judge does have some discretion on what type of garb is allowed. Not total control, but some.

    If the head covering was intrusive and disruptive to the proceedings, the court has every right to require its removal. If the head covering wasn’t intrusive, then the Judge might be overstepping his authority.

    #4, Cap’n,

    The Judge can and very often does edit and change the record when it is unfavorable to him. When a Judge orders someone to do something there is little the person can do except obey. Arguing with a Judge may be contempt.

    Regardless, the Judge never questioned her on the need for the headgear. I assume the good Judge would also not inquire if the Pope needed a hat before telling him to remove that in his courtroom.

  9. Dallas says:

    Gotta admit, a hijab goes with everthing.

  10. Special Ed says:

    #2 Jäg – fap, fap, fap, fap, fap – honey, who’s you BaghDaddy?

    I still think we should head over there and open a facey bar.

  11. Jägermeister says:

    #8 – Mr. Fusion

    The question is… would they ask the same of a nun? [probably NSFW]

  12. skunky says:

    John asks where do you draw the line?

    Where do YOU draw the line, John? Should a Jew have to remove his yarmulke, or a Sikh his turban?

    Quakers were persecuted in Britain for not removing their hats in court, and went on to found Pennsylvania to flee such persecution.

  13. Jägermeister says:

    #10 – Special Ed – who’s you BaghDaddy?

    LMAO!!!

  14. roastedpeanuts says:

    Is everyone missing the point?

    “It says the judge denied Albaghdady’s petition for a name change, saying that she had filed her petition five days too early. No further details were offered.”

    She was trying to get her *name changed*. Denied or not, if someone is trying to get their name changed I imagine they would have to show their face to the judge.

    If not, look out for mail for John Abdul Mohammad Mr. Dvrorak, it just might be for you.

  15. mark says:

    Cap’n – Thanks for sharing the truth. Sounds like just another trouble-making muslim. Maybe she should go to England where they fall for this crap.

  16. SN says:

    12. “Should a Jew have to remove his yarmulke, or a Sikh his turban?

    But neither of those conceal a person’s facial expression or identity. When attempting an analogy it’s best to pick something analogous.

  17. bobbo, I'm not seeing it says:

    #14–nuts==is a rose not a rose by any other name? Whats the face got to do with it????

    And trying to meet you half way, I can give up and say to get a name change you have to show your face (why again?) but I can deny a name change whether you have a face or not.

    Some stand up comedian did a bit on the Credits for a Japanese Movie===Onoshina Yakuda was played by Tamasuko Binada. He wondered why they just didn’t use their real names as in who cared???

    think I saw a special credit where Biff played himself. Its weird to go to a movie in LA. Very bad form to leave until all -ALL- the credits have rolled. All the posers pretending they are waiting to see their names.

    Hah, hah.

  18. SN says:

    John, I just wanted to point out that this happened in Michigan before.

    And I also wanted to point out why it’s happening so much in Michigan. it’s because the Detroit area has the highest population of Muslims in all of North America.

  19. bobbo, I'm not an iconoclast says:

    SN–that thread is much better quality than this here one.

    I asked better questions back then than now. I wonder if a judge can tell from facial expressions if a woman actually doens’t want to have her name changed?

  20. Jägermeister says:

    #18 – SN – it’s because the Detroit area has the highest population of Muslims in all of North America.

    There are more Muslims in the greater Toronto area.

  21. Ah_Yea says:

    This was obviously a setup by the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

    They are trying to impose their laws on our courts.

    It obvious to those who actually read the article.

  22. Ah_Yea says:

    Rick, exactly. They live in our country under our laws.

    Case closed.

  23. Grandpa says:

    How can you make a judgment on a person you cannot see? Seems like the judge should have total discretionary preference. Would they leave the garb on her if she were brought into a hospital from a car wreck?

    The money says “In God we Trust” not Allah. If you don’t like it, go elsewhere.

  24. Grayven says:

    Wouldn’t an outfit like this make a judge or jury less inclined to find in favor of the wearer? I think it would, which makes the point moot. She can wear the hajib if she wants to lose, so let her wear it.

  25. Cap'nKangaroo says:

    #8 If your stating that the judge ordered the woman’s protestations removed from the record, the the judge is on very dangerous ice. But I believe it would be a very far stretch to believe a judge in open court would order such a thing. I stand by my believe that the plaintiffs are reaching.

    “The suit comes a day after the state’s Supreme Court issued an order allowing lower state courts to “exercise reasonable control” over the appearance of witnesses and parties to lawsuits, a rule change that had been proposed after a Muslim woman refused to remove an Islamic garment in a small claims court.”

  26. Mr. Fusion says:

    #11, Jag,

    I was expecting you to post this picture.

    Aahh, good taste will always be remembered.

  27. Mr. Fusion says:

    #14, Roasted

    someone is trying to get their name changed I imagine they would have to show their face to the judge.

    #16, SN,

    But neither of those conceal a person’s facial expression or identity.

    #23, Rick Cain,

    There could be a man underneath that hijab, or maybe its just a very hairy persian woman.

    #25, Grandpa,

    How can you make a judgment on a person you cannot see?

    What each one of you people failed to grasp is that a hajab is a head covering scarf. It is not a veil and the entire face is visible. While ignorance is bliss, this was pointed out in #2 by Jagermeister.

    Here, look at some more hajabs.
    http://tinyurl.com/lgglkd

  28. Dr Dodd says:

    Pure genius. What better way to get a suicide bomber into a courtroom. You gotta admire their ingenuity. Boom.

    No, that could never happen.

  29. Olo Baggins of Bywater says:

    Dodd…you cannot get into a Wayne County courthouse without passing through a metal detector.

  30. Dr Dodd says:

    #31-Baggins-you cannot get into a Wayne County courthouse without passing through a metal detector.

    You would think that would be enough, but it seems that during a security test government investigators were able to smuggle bomb-making materials into 10 federal buildings.

    Yep, right past the police agency charged with protecting those buildings. They also found numerous other gaps in security, according to the congressional report.

    So you see federal buildings are not as safe as we would like to believe.


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 5638 access attempts in the last 7 days.