Creeping sharia in the OC

Saying "...her religion forbids her to expose her head or neck to men outside her immediate family" and having the Ninth Court of Appeals uphold that aspect of sharia law bodes ill for our constitution and our civil laws.  Whether or not this situation applies to detention cells is irrelevant, the Sheriffs have every right to have articles of clothing, jewelry, shoes and other potentially deadly items removed from the person for their duration of the stay, which in this case is no more than 12 hours.

Now that she has been given the green light to sue, expect more of these kinds of suits.  It is us who must bend to Muslim norms, never the other way round.

We are seeing another example of our courts allowing one aspect of sharia law to be used, thinking it is innocuous enough as to not be a problem.

I hope they will think again, but past performance regarding creeping sharia dictates otherwise.


From SFGate March 16 by Bob Egelko

Muslim defendant can sue over hijab removal

A law guaranteeing religious freedom to prisoners applies to a courthouse holding cell where sheriff's deputies ordered a Muslim woman to remove her headscarf, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

The 11-0 decision by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated a lawsuit by Souhair Khatib against Orange County, where officers made her take off her hijab for security reasons while she was held in the cell to await a court hearing.

The law, passed by Congress in 2000, prohibits the government from imposing a "substantial burden" on prisoners' religious practices unless officials can show a compelling need for the restrictions.

The Obama administration joined Khatib in arguing that the law applied to courthouse holding cells.

County officials argued that the law covered only prisons and other institutions that hold inmates for substantial periods, and not to the courthouse cells where those awaiting criminal proceedings can be kept for up to 12 hours.

A federal judge and a three-judge appeals panel agreed with the county and ordered the suit dismissed. But after the full appeals court granted a rehearing, Tuesday's panel said the holding cells in Santa Ana, which house as many as 600 inmates, fit the definition of either a pretrial detention facility or a jail. Both are covered by the law.

It appears the number of detainees, 600 determined how the detention facility was perceived, rather than the reason that it is only a detention cell and not a regular cell for those with an imposed sentence.

"Congress intended to safeguard the permissible religious observance of powerless persons incarcerated by the state" and specified that the law should be interpreted broadly, Judge Ronald Gould said in a separate opinion endorsing the ruling.

The court returned the case to a federal judge to decide whether the deputies interfered with Khatib's religious freedom without a compelling security need. Becky Kieffer, a lawyer for Khatib, said federal prisons allow Muslim women to wear approved headscarves and that the county should follow their practice.

Read it all