Law.com - 3rd Circuit Rejects Muslim Cop's Bid to Wear ReligiousScarf

[Paul Finkelman]

I also wonder if a hear scarf raises safety issues if the office is involved in a pysical confrontation; it also seems to me that or most paramilitary organizations the uniform must be "uniform" -- you can't have everyone mondifying the uniform to suit them.  It reminds me of the O'Connor dissent in Goldman -- she would allow the yarlmulke because it was covered and did not actually aler the uniform; I suppose Phil. could create a headscarf for its uniforms. 

----
Paul Finkelman
President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
Albany Law School
80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, NY 12208

518-445-3386 (p)
518-445-3363 (f)

pfink at albanylaw.edu

www.paulfinkelman.com

--- On Wed, 4/8/09, Volokh, Eugene <VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu> wrote:


From: Volokh, Eugene <VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu>
Subject: RE: Law.com - 3rd Circuit Rejects Muslim Cop's Bid to Wear ReligiousScarf
To: "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics" <religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu>
Date: Wednesday, April 8, 2009, 12:16 PM


    Is the rule really against wearing religious attire?  I couldn't
quickly find Police Department Directive 78 -- the relevant rule --
online, but as I understand it, it sets forth a specific uniform, and
all deviations from the uniform are prohibited, whether they are
religious or otherwise.  I doubt, for instance, that the department
would allow the wearing of political buttons, or ethnic symbols, or just
the officer's favorite hat.  Or am I missing something?

    Eugene

> -----Original Message-----
> From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu 
> [mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of David Cruz
> Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 8:24 AM
> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Subject: RE: Law.com - 3rd Circuit Rejects Muslim Cop's Bid 
> to Wear ReligiousScarf
> 
> I don't understand why counsel would not have argued starting 
> with the complaint that a rule against wearing *religious* 
> symbols or attire was not a "neutral law of general 
> applicability" and thus should receive strict scrutiny under 
> the federal Free Exercise Clause.
> 
> David B. Cruz
> Professor of Law
> University of Southern California Gould School of Law
> 699 Exposition Blvd.
> Los Angeles, CA 90089-0071
> U.S.A.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
> [mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Joel Sogol
> Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 2:05 AM
> To: Religionlaw
> Subject: Law.com - 3rd Circuit Rejects Muslim Cop's Bid to 
> Wear Religious Scarf
> 
> A Muslim woman who works as a Philadelphia police officer has 
> lost her court battle to wear a religious head scarf on the 
> job now that the 3rd U.S.
> Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that forcing the 
> department to accommodate her would compromise the city's 
> interest in maintaining "religious neutrality" in its police force.
> 
> http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202429736190
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu To 
> subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
> 
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be 
> viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read 
> messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; 
> and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
> messages to others.
> 
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20090408/d9533049/attachment.htm>