Muslim cites beliefs as ID photo trial begins (new revelations)

MIami Herald ^ | May 28, 2003 | PHIL LONG

[FairOpinion]

ORLANDO -- Speaking softly from behind a black veil, only her eyes visible as they moved from the face of her questioner to the judge, Sultaana Freeman cited the religious beliefs that have brought her into conflict with the state over her driver's license photo.

Freeman, 35, who became a Muslim in 1997 and started wearing a veil full time shortly after that, told Circuit Judge Janet C. Thorpe she is opposed to being photographed or being seen without her veil.

It was a mistake that allowed Freeman to be photographed for her driver's license wearing a niqab, a religious veil that covers all of the face except the eyes, said Senior Assistant Attorney General Jay Vail.

The state has revoked Freeman's license until she agrees to a new photograph showing her full face. Freeman is suing the state, charging that the demand violates her religious freedom.

Thorpe, who is presiding over a nonjury trial expected to run through Thursday, must decide if the state's public safety and other interests in requiring the full-face photo outweigh Freeman's religious beliefs.

Freeman, in a written statement, said her veiling is her practice of the Koran's insistence on modesty, ``the ultimate in self-respect and feminism, as this liberating act sent a message that I am not an object of sexual fulfillment, but a person of strong religious conviction.''

On the witness stand, Freeman said she has no photos in her house. When she buys an item like cereal that has a person's photograph on the box, she crosses off the face with a magic marker.

Freeman acknowledged she was photographed without a veil after her arrest in 1998 in Decatur, Ill., on a domestic battery charge involving one of the twin 3-year-old sisters who were in her foster care.

The Associated Press reported that the children were removed from her home. Child-welfare workers told investigators in Decatur that Freeman and her husband had used their claims of religious modesty to hinder them from looking for bruises on the girls, according to Decatur police records.

Thorpe didn't allow many of the facts about Freeman's arrest into evidence.

Florida's insistence on a full-face photo is a case of discrimination spurred by the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, said Howard Marks, an attorney representing Freeman on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Until then, Marks said, the state ''had no problem accommodating the religious beliefs of Muslim women who required veiling,'' Marks said.

Vail, arguing for the state, said the full-face photo law and policy have been in place for years. He said a state employee mistakenly allowed Freeman to be photographed wearing her niqab in early 2001.

In December 2001, after a call from a Central Florida state attorney's office, the department wrote Freeman saying she would have to be photographed full-face or risk losing her license. She refused and her license was revoked in early 2002.

Sandy Lambert, state driver's license director, said that only Freeman and one other woman, whom she did not identify, have had their licenses revoked in the past few years for refusing to be photographed.

Lambert and Vail denied any post-Sept. 11 discrimination.

''We have had this law in place for many, many years, so there has been no change since 9/11,'' Lambert said.

The picture is crucial for police officers who want to know who is driving a car, whether that person has been reported missing or is a criminal, officials say.

A driver's license, ''is no longer just a driving permit,'' Lambert said. ``It has become the No. 1 identification document.''

Marks said 13 states allow exceptions for religious concerns.

As a mother of children ages 6 months and 2, being unable to drive has caused a ''great deal of stress,'' Freeman testified.

''It has changed my life really,'' she said. ``I feel like a prisoner in my own home.''

[PALACE ATHENA]

there is one word for this woman..wacko!! she is wasting our money and time.

[Drango]

The state can and does overrule TRUE religious convictions. All the time. 3 examples off the top of my head...

Mormons and polygamy, snakehandling, Indians and peyote

[Mustang]

If the court rules in this nitwits favor...standby for some heavy duty media coverage when some Florida cracker Klan folks show up wearing their hoods as they try to renew their driving license and photo.

Mustang sends from "Malpaso News"...

[cinFLA]

what else can you expect from a state that srew up the elctions?

You are sick.

[Modernman]

"I heard this ACLU guy say last night on a news program that FL has issued "millions" of non-photo DL's that are still valid. I have to say, that if what he says is true, then she has a right to gripe, legit or not"

He was telling part of the truth. Florida issues temporary drivers licenses in the interim period between when you take the driver's exam and when you receive your real driver's license. Takes about 4-6 weeks to receive the permanent license. So, technically, Florida has issued millions of picture-less licenses, but the situation is completely different.

[killjoy]

Freeman acknowledged she was photographed without a veil after her arrest in 1998 in Decatur, Ill., on a domestic battery charge involving one of the twin 3-year-old sisters who were in her foster care.

Why not just put her arrest photo on her drivers license? :)

[Mister Baredog]

The ACLU will rush to the assistance of this dis-abled victim and pronounce that the State has no compelling interest in humiliating the individual, etc

They already are. The same ACLU that campaigns against Christmas every year.

[martianagent]

What anybody should say to any woman they ever see in America with a burka or similar full-face mask on, such as the woman in question is wearing:

"Pardon me lady, but if you're interested, I know a place you could buy a pistol to shoot the sorry A##-#### who's making you wear that thing..."

[SunStar]

Thorpe, who is presiding over a nonjury trial expected to run through Thursday, must decide if the state's public safety and other interests in requiring the full-face photo outweigh Freeman's religious beliefs.

Where are the ACLU and their "separation of church and state" line? Oh, I forgot, this is not about tearing down crosses and destroying other Judeo-Christian American heritage, but about allowing foreign cultures like Islam to infiltrate our society.

[killjoy]

Florida issues temporary drivers licenses in the interim period between when you take the driver's exam and when you receive your real driver's license. Takes about 4-6 weeks to receive the permanent license.

Huh? In Florida, you go to the DMV, take your written test and then take your driving test. If you pass both of them, your picture is taken and your DL is given to you about 5 minutes later. This all takes place at the same time. Where did you get this information?

[BrooklynGOP]

Driving is a privelege - not a right.

[DonQ]

There have been other cases in which unlicensed drivers tried to make excuses that they somehow had religious scruples against getting driver's licenses. The courts invariably noted that they had a guaranteed right to their religious convictions ... however, they didn't have a guaranteed right to pilot an automobile on the public highways. Their religious scruples might be compulsory (to them) but driving a vehicle is entirely optional, so it was up to them whether their religious convictions or their driving privileges would get top priority.

[detsaoT]

Whatever the hell happened to equality under the law The law says X. If you don't do X, you get a mandatory punishment of Y. In a just society, there should be absolutely no room in this equation for "punishment, unless you are a member of oppressed group Z" at all, yet this is what the ACTIVIST COURTS, egged on by FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS are bringing on us.

Lawyers are the death of this once-great nation. Scumbags, all of them! It is high time we disband the state bar associations and come up with a way to roll back the largesse they have cursed us with. Laws should be simple, NOT chock full of conditionals and line-item exceptions. It's high time we put a limit on the number of words a law can contain - roll back the tide of oligarchy!

ARGH.

:/ ttt

[detsaoT]

Whatever the hell happened to equality under the law The law says X. If you don't do X, you get a mandatory punishment of Y. In a just society, there should be absolutely no room in this equation for "punishment, unless you are a member of oppressed group Z" at all, yet this is what the ACTIVIST COURTS, egged on by FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS are bringing on us.

Lawyers are the death of this once-great nation. Scumbags, all of them! It is high time we disband the state bar associations and come up with a way to roll back the largesse they have cursed us with. Laws should be simple, NOT chock full of conditionals and line-item exceptions. It's high time we put a limit on the number of words a law can contain - roll back the tide of oligarchy!

ARGH.

:/ ttt

[Conspiracy Guy]

My religion forbids me from obeying speed limits. In my religion road signs are graven idols and must never be obeyed. I get a lot of strange looks and people flip me off for being on the same side of the road as they are, going in the opposite direction. But my religion tells me that these people are infidels and they should be scorned.

[detsaoT]

Sorry for the duplicate. The abuse of our legal system makes me so angry!!

[Modernman]

Maybe I'm showing my age. That's how I remember it working "back in the day." It's been a while since I got my original driver's license.

[tracer]

You may have been joking, but, in all seriousness, your suggestion is Solomonic in its wisdom. Such would solve this mess handily and thwart this gold-digger at the same time.

You should contact the FL DVM with your suggestion. And haha on that phony trouble maker -- I hope that she has to pay court costs. Good catch........

[tbpiper]

what else can you expect from a state that srew up the elctions?

I C your point. (oh, by the way, here's a spare e)

[FairOpinion]

Butnotice that the ACLU is not defending either of the two woman ( one a librarian, one a teacher's aide)who were fired for wearing a small cross pendant.

I guess Christians aren't entitled to freedom of religion, only Muslims do, according to the ACLU.

And of course those cases vs. this one are completely different. Those women's issues really were religious freedom, while this woman doesn't understand that freedom of religion guarantees her the right to practice her religion without being persecuted for it, but doesn't guarantee a driver's licence.