A Florida clerk made a mistake and allowed a Muslim woman to have her driver's license picture taken with her veil on. When the State of Florida finally figured this out, they sent Sultaana Freeman a notice saying she had to get her picture retaken without her veil to keep her license. She refused and the State revoked her license. Showing how much she had adapted to the US, she sued.
If I were the judge, I would have refused to hear the case and dismissed it. But the suit is going forward as a freedom of religion issue. There are compelling safety reasons for the State to require a picture ID for driver licenses. And a license is not a legal right, Ms. Freeman could elect to not drive if she felt her religion banned such a picture. This is such a basic and simple point, I am surprised that one would argue otherwise. Chris Muir points out a potential outcome of a decision in favor of Ms. Freeman.
Since a legal victory by Ms. Freeman would negatively impact the safety of US citizens and since the religious "right" in question is not based upon Christianity, it came as no surprise that the ACLU is supporting Ms. Freeman. Hopefully, the ACLU will lose in their attempt to make the US a more dangerous place. If anyone has done an analysis of the ACLU's legal record, I would like to see it. I have the impression that the ACLU has been losing the majority of their cases recently. At any event, I will be keeping an eye on this case. It will be interesting to see who else joins the ACLU in supporting Ms. Freeman.
