Legal Jihad Escalates in Michigan
They always come back, and yesterday the woman whose small claims case was thrown out when she refused to remove her face mask filed suit against the judge: Muslim sues judge who barred veil. (Hat tip: LGF readers.)
A Muslim woman who was told she had to remove her veil if she wanted to testify in 31st District Court in Hamtramck filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday against the judge who made the ruling.
Ginnah Muhammad filed the complaint against Judge Paul Paruk, alleging he violated her religious rights and denied her equal access to the courts.
Muhammad had gone to small claims court last October in a dispute with a car rental company when Paruk said she could not testify unless she removed her veil, the lawsuit alleges.
“If in fact, you do not wish to do it, then I cannot go forward with your case and I have to dismiss your case,” Paruk told the woman, according to a transcript attached to the complaint filed by Dearborn Heights lawyer Nabih Ayad. Muhammad refused and Paruk dismissed the case, the lawsuit alleges. Paruk did not return a phone call.
“I’m a human being and I wanted to come to court to get justice,” Muhammad said at a news conference Wednesday outside the federal courthouse in Detroit. “When I walked out, I just really felt empty, like the courts didn’t care about me.”
The Quran doesn’t explicitly require women to cover their face, but many Muslim women wear a hajib or other covering as a sign of piety and modesty.
The Detroit News is amazingly clueless on this issue. Forget about the fact that they won’t even consider the possibility this is a radical Islamic agenda at work; that’s not a “veil” she’s wearing, it’s a niqab, a full-body disguise, one step away from the burqa (which obscures the eyes as well). And the word for the veil that covers the head and hair is “hijab,” not “hajib.” Sheesh.