Woman’s Suit Against Judge Who Asked Her to Remove Veil Gets Tossed
A federal judge in Detroit has dismissed a woman’s lawsuit against a small claims judge who asked her to remove her veil.
The woman, Ginnnah Muhammad, had claimed Judge Paul Paruk of Hamtramck unconstitutionally interfered with her right to practice religion and violated a civil rights law requiring access to courts.
U.S. District Judge John Feikens said he was declining to exercise jurisdiction in the matter. In his opinion (PDF posted by How Appealing), Feikens wrote that Paruk had asked the woman to remove the veil so he could judge her credibility when testifying. Muhammad responded that she is a practicing Muslim and she could not remove her veil in front of a male judge.
Paruk then asserted that Muhammad’s choice to wear a veil was not a “religious thing” but rather a “custom thing” and dismissed her complaint against a rental car company. However, the dismissal was without prejudice, which meant Muhammad could refile her lawsuit disputing a charge for repairs to a rented vehicle.
Feikens wrote that the only option available to him under constitutional and statutory law was to issue a declaratory judgment in the case. But he said he could decline to exercise jurisdiction based on several factors. One factor he cited was the possibility that a ruling would increase friction between state and federal courts. He also noted that Muhammad could have refiled her case in the state court’s general civil division, entitling her to review of an adverse decision.
A hat tip to How Appealing, which posted the ruling and an AP story about the decision.
