User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 11:08:51 PM EDT
No mention of the aclu in this article, but I remember that they represented her.........
they argued that a photo ONLY showing her eyes was enough to establish identification  Fla. appeals court upholds ban of veil in driver's license photo The Associated Press September 7, 2005 www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/orl-bk-freeman090705,0,2758466.story?coll=ny-leadnationalnews-headlines DAYTONA BEACH -- A Muslim woman who wanted to wear a veil in her driver's license photo must follow a Florida law that requires a picture of her full face, according to a state appeals court. The Fifth District Court of Appeal upheld a 2003 ruling by an Orlando judge that Sultaana Freeman's right to free exercise of religion would not be burdened by the photo requirement. "We recognized the tension created as a result of choosing between following the dictates of one's religion and the mandates of secular law," Appellate Judge Emerson R. Thompson Jr. wrote in Friday's 15-page opinion. "However, as long as the laws are neutral and generally applicable to the citizenry, they must be obeyed." A message left early today for Freeman's attorney, Howard Marks, was not immediately returned. The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles issued Freeman, 38, of Winter Park, a license in 2001 showing her veiled with only her eyes visible, but later suspended it. Freeman sued the state, claiming the suspension infringed upon her First Amendment rights. She lost her civil lawsuit in 2003 when Circuit Judge Janet C. Thorpe agreed with authorities that letting people show only their eyes would undermine efforts to stop terrorists. Gov. Jeb Bush signed legislation in 2003 requiring a picture of a driver's full face on a license. The appeals court found enforcement of the law "did not compel Freeman to engage in conduct that her religion forbids -- her religion does not forbid all photographs." |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 11:31:34 PM EDT
[#1]
It's nice to see that common sense wins one for once. I mean, what is the point of a photo ID if the person in the picture is wearing what amounts to a mask? The photo on the ID is useless for it's sole purpose.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 11:33:40 PM EDT
[#2]
good! WTF is the point of an ID if you cant see the damn face!
Why am I always so proud of FL law prevailing over bullshit? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 11:44:51 PM EDT
[#3]
Easy, you want your 1st amendment rights fine. DON'T DRIVE. Driving is not a right. If you don't want your pic. on a license, by all means don't. Just don't bitch when you can't legally get behind the wheel.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 11:47:23 PM EDT
[#4]
If the court went the other way, id demand they take my picture with a President Nixon mask.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 11:56:56 PM EDT
[#5]
I'd go for one of these, just to be a dick 
|
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
