In Defense Of The
News & Analysis
015/08 December 20, 2008
CAIR's Ibrahim Hooper: Special "Rights" for Muslims?
From the articles, we learn that Valentine was stopped before going through the metal detector and informed by the bailiff that she would not be permitted into the courtroom unless she removed her head covering.
After informing the bailiff that wearing the head covering was “her right”, Valentine (Miedah):
she tried to leave, the bailiff's stopped her. She admits she
then pulled away when a bailiff grabbed her arm. She said she was handcuffed
and brought before Judge Keith Rollins.
It didn’t help that Valentine used profane language during the confrontation.
Valentine refuses to comply with the orders of a judge and pulls away from the bailiff after arguing, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) rushes in to defend what is apparently a case of very rude behavior in a courthouse over the insistence of a “right” not in existence in current law.
Judge Rollins imposed a ten-day sentence for contempt which was later reduced to six hours. Attempts to gather more information from the Douglasville, Georgia Police Department were unsuccessful.
CAIR Spokesman, Ibrahim Hooper, had this to say:
somebody is denied
access to our
does that say? No Muslim woman can have access to a courtroom in Douglasville, Georgia?…
“A judge does have the right to set decorum in a courtroom, but you can’t use those standards
to violate someone’s legal rights.”
Hooper mentions “legal rights”, but just what does this mean? A Muslim woman should be allowed to wear a headscarf in the courtroom, but a non-Muslim woman is banned from wearing a head covering? If so, would Muslim women have to carry a special government ID to prove they are Muslim?
What about the “rights” of non-Muslim women to wear a headscarf in a courtroom? How would this square with the Constitution which is crystal clear on the point that all people are equal before the law? Is there a “special” Constitution for Muslims, or not?
There are many religious beliefs that do not fit in with current courthouse security regulations; for instance, Sikh men carry small daggers as part of their religious beliefs; should they be permitted to carry these weapons into the courthouse?
If not, why not?
From what we know, Judge Rollins does not permit anyone, Muslim or not, to wear a head covering of any kind in his court.
Therefore, no discrimination has taken place.
Hooper has filed a complaint with the US Attorney Generals Office regarding this incident.
Good for him. This issue needs to be resolved once and for all. Is the Judge in control of the courtroom, or CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood front group created for Hamas?
Please use a non-corporate/non-work e-mail address if you contact CAIR or Anti-CAIR or receive our material. CAIR may attempt to shame your employer into terminating you if they believe you are receiving "objectionable" material. We make every reasonable effort to protect our mailing list, but we cannot guarantee confidentiality. Anti-CAIR does not share, loan, sell, rent or otherwise publicize our mailing list. We respect your privacy!
All persons are invited to submit tips and leads. Anti-CAIR will acknowledge receipt of all tips/leads, but we will NOT acknowledge the source of ANY tip or lead in our Press Releases or on our web site. Exceptions are made for leading media personalities at the discretion of Anti-CAIR and only on request of the person(s) submitting the tip or lead.