[Type text]

University of Colorado-Denver

Discrimination of
Veiled Muslim
Women in the
United States and
France

Huda J. Ghaibeh
May 4th, 2010
 Ghaibeh 2

Muslims increasing populations in both France and the United States means an increase in the

number of veiled women. These two nations, who are mostly non-Muslim, have not done the best job at

allowing these women, who are mostly immigrants or children and grandchildren of immigrants, to integrate

well into their nations. There have been cases of discrimination towards veiled women in both nations,

most obviously in France where the debate of the ban of the veil continues. France has implemented laws

and is still in the process of implementing additional laws in which the wearing of the Islamic veil became

forbidden in certain situations. However, the United States is also guilty of discriminatory acts towards

Muslim veiled women but in a much less obvious way because the American government does not outlaw

the veil so directly like France does. Discrimination towards Muslim veiled women in the United States is

very discreet and covert while discrimination in France is much more obvious and overt. Exact statistics on

discrimination between the two nations cannot be known exactly, however. There are many cases that go

unreported, for example. It is also difficult to know the exact number of veiled women as well as the exact

number of Muslims in either nation. However, we do know that numbers of Muslims and veiled Muslim

women are increasing in both countries, which is why this issue is so important. Also, many veiled Muslim

women feel uncomfortable, unhappy, and possibly fearful in both nations.

Upon encountering different sources concerning the Islamic veil, I will focus on a few in this paper:

hijab, niqab, and burqa. The BBC explains that the hijab involves the covering of the head and neck leaving

the face visible. A niqab involves an additional covering of the face with the exception of the eyes, and a

burqa involves a complete covering with a net-like fabric over the eye area.1

Muslims have been coming to the United States over many years. Amir Muhammad cites

information from CSAM that between 1947 and 1960, a large number of Muslims from Egypt, Lebanon,

Palestine, and Yugoslavia immigrated to the United States, and from the 1960s through 1980 an additional

large number of Muslims from various nations immigrated here. Muslim communities have grown a great

deal throughout the 1980s and 1990s, and today Islam is the fastest growing religion in the United States.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which focuses on civil rights, was created in 1994.2
 Ghaibeh 3

Garamone’s article of 2001 in the U.S. Department of Defense says that the religion of Islam is

increasing more rapidly than any other religion in America. The American Muslim population ranges

between five and seven million.3 However, regarding the number of Muslims in the United States, the

Religious Tolerance organization explains that there is no way to find out this number exactly, and estimates

of the number of Muslims in North America range from one to seven million as of 2002.4 The U.S. Census

Bureau reports that the population of the United States is approximately 309 million for the year 2010.5

The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States is about freedom of religion. It states:

“Congress should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise

thereof…”6 Therefore, the United States government is not allowed to interfere with an individual’s choice

to wear religious attire, such as the Muslim veil. Also, according to the U.S. National Archives and Records

Administration, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 banned discrimination in the hiring, promoting, and firing of

people on the basis of race.7

However, McCloud describes a few discriminatory situations which have occurred in the United

States in her article from 1995-1996. For example, she explains an article from the Washington Post that in

the state of California a Muslim woman was fired from her job as a Pinkerton Security & Investigation

Services security guard because her boss told her that her headscarf could not be part of the uniform even

though she was hired while wearing the headscarf. When she was hired, the company did not mention to

her that they could not hire her with her headscarf. There is another instance which McCloud includes in

her article which she cited from the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). In the state of

Virginia, a headscarved woman was fired immediately after completing her job orientation for declining to

take off her headscarf. This case is similar to the previous one because this woman was also not told that

she must remove her headscarf during her job orientation. Also, like the previous case, the wearing of the

headscarf would not prevent or make difficult the ability to accomplish the job tasks. Hiring staffs of

companies realize that they cannot refuse work to qualified applicants for religious reasons because it is

illegal. Companies prefer firing the women later in hope of protecting themselves and their reputation.
 Ghaibeh 4

They prefer to use the excuse that the women with headscarves declined the removal of their scarves when

told the scarves did not fit with the uniforms even though the women were not told they had to do so upon

their hiring. Also, companies feel that their customers prefer shopping from people who do not consist of

minorities by their different attire. Hiring staffs were probably trying to avoid being accused of

discrimination when they hired the women with headscarves. So, they created the excuse that the scarves

could not work with the uniforms. In both cases, the women held top positions within the companies in

which they were hired, and the companies probably feared negative reactions from customers.8

McCloud cited third case from the Washington Post in which a veiled women who declined the

removal of her headscarf was not allowed to report to work at the Quality Inn. The manager explained that

her headscarf would not fit in with the uniform, and other employees may begin to wear headscarves if she

worked at the hotel. When members of the Muslim community objected and tried compromising, the hiring

staff expressed their apology, offered to pay lawyer fees, and allowed her to work with them.9

In addition to discrimination in the workplace, there is public discrimination of women with

headscarves. McCloud has included information presented by CAIR which cited its information as coming

from the Dallas Morning News and the Fort Worth Star-Telegram newspapers. According to these sources,

a Muslim wearing a face veil was forbidden from entering a convenience store in Arlington, Texas. An

employee explained that her attire as a customer was forbidden. CAIR contacted the owners of this

Diamond Shamrock, Inc., and after threats of boycotts and objections the company decided to offer money

in order to compensate for their act.10

Also, McCloud cited a story from Pesce’s article in USA Today explaining that a woman with a face

veil was arrested in St. Paul, Minnesota. The city accordingly banned face coverings after recent robberies

in the city.11 This does not seem like discrimination though it can be considered disrespectful to the woman

who was probably innocent and simply wanted the freedom to wear what she believed she had to wear for

her faith.
 Ghaibeh 5

McCloud also brings up an excellent point in her article about many veiled Muslim women in the

American workforce. She explains that there are rarely any veiled women in high profile positions. These

women apply for high profile careers but rarely pass the interview stage despite their qualifications. Some

Muslims and non-Muslims suggest to these women that they remove their headscarves. Even peers and

colleagues in universities discourage the wearing of the veil. Some the veiled women actually do remove

their veils.12

The BBC reports that in 2002 a Muslim American woman named Sultaana Freeman, who wears a

facial veil that only permits her eyes to be shown, tried to sue the state when they refused to offer her a

driver’s license because she refused to take off her facial veil. She aimed to protect her right of religious

freedom. However, Judge Thorpe did not consider the need to show the face for a driver’s license photo

threaten religious freedom. She reasoned that showing the face was necessary for security reasons.

Freeman believes she must cover her face for religious reasons, but Muslim scholars differ on whether or

not the face should be covered. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) actually supported Freeman

in this case claiming that this type of prejudice was probably due to then very recent attacks of 9/11.13

However, the case of Freeman does not seem like a true discriminatory case as the reason for the veil

removal request was for security and identity purposes.

The 2007 report of “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States” shows that in

1995/1996, the number of civil rights cases of discrimination reported against Muslims in general (male or

female) was 80. In 1996/1997, there were 240 cases reported. In 1997/1998, there were 284 cases reported.

In 1998/1999, there were 285 cases reported, and in1999/2000, the number of civil rights cases of

discrimination reported was under 322.14 These numbers include all Muslims who reported a case of

discrimination, whether headscarved women or not. The point is that the numbers of cases of discrimination

against Muslims have been increasing over the years.

Another table in the same report by CAIR records the most common places for acts of discrimination

towards all Muslims, which are summarized here from the most common place to the least common place:
 Ghaibeh 6

Muslim organization/mosque (26.43%), government agency (22.84%), workplace (18.12%), school

(5.61%), prison, police, public accommodation, airport (2.71%), internet/email/mail/phone, court, housing,

media, street, Muslim-owned business, other, private home/property, shopping center, and financial

institution.15 We do not know where veiled women may have experienced the most discrimination. But we

do know that they have experienced it in the workplace. Also, we can hypothesize that they have

experienced it in school, airports, over the internet/email/mail/phone, shopping centers, private

home/property, and maybe other places.

In the Council of American Islamic Relations’ Status of Muslim Civil Rights Reports of 1999,

complaints by headscarved women came in second place, which seems to be progress compared to previous

years.16 According to the New York City Commission on Human Rights, the NYPD Hate Crimes Task

Force has realized a significant increase in discriminatory acts in the weeks after 9/11. In addition, results

from a survey reveal that Muslims believe discriminatory acts towards them has risen significantly after

9/11.17 Unfortunately, the 9/11 incident affected both Muslims and non-Muslims, making the lives of so

both more difficult. CAIR also includes information from their report, “American Muslims: One Year

After 9/11” that within the six months after 9/11, there have been 1,717 cases of civil rights cases reported

for both male and female Muslims, which is a significant increase compared to the previous years.18

CAIR included a study in the report “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States:

Unequal Protection” in 2005 regarding percentages of headscarved women in America who have been

discriminated against. In 2005 there were 131 cases reported of discrimination by hijab or scarf wearing

women, which is 8.64% of the triggers of discrimination. Also, in 2005, there were 6 reported cases of

discrimination by women who wear the niqab, which is 0.4% of the triggers of discrimination. Other

triggers of discrimination included things such as beards, Muslim names, halal food, Kuran, etc.19

CAIR’s “Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States” for 2008 reports that out of the

identification factors that trigger discrimination, there were 165 cases reported of headscarved women or

6.22% from the total factors. Also, there were 8 cases reported of niqab wearing women, or 0.3% from the
 Ghaibeh 7

total factors.20 Therefore, there is an increase in discriminatory acts towards both hijab wearing and niqab

wearing women in the United States.

CAIR also included another study regarding all Muslims in America that there has been an eleven

percent increase in civil rights reports from 2006 from 2007 (from 2,467 to 2,652 cases) and a three percent

increase in civil rights reports from 2007 to 2008 (from 2,652 to 2,728 cases). Also, CAIR included a study

in the report “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States: Seeking Full Inclusion” in which

percentages of headscarved women in America who have been discriminated against were offered for the

year 2009. There have been 153 reports of discrimination of hijab wearing women, which is 5.61% of all

the factors triggering discrimination. Also, there has been 16 reports of discrimination of women who wear

the niqab, which is 0.59% of the factors triggering discrimination.21 Between 2008 and 2009 there appears

to be a significant rise in the number of reports of discriminatory acts toward niqab wearing women in the

United States.

The American Civil Liberties Union reports in their article “Discrimination Against Muslim

Women” that Muslim women have been banned from wearing their veil in several contexts. They have

experienced employment discrimination, harassment, a refusal of access to public places, among other types

of discrimination. Their headscarves make them stand out, which makes them particularly vulnerable to

discrimination. In fact, they have increasingly been harassed since 9/11.22 The ACLU mentions that expert

Alyssa Rippy has found that 69% of veiled women have experienced discrimination at least once compared

to 29% of unveiled women.23

The ACLU also mentions where or in what situations veiled women have experienced

discrimination in America: work, school, law enforcement contexts, public places, and in a obtaining

driver’s license. For example, the ACLU cites that teachers have been prevented from wearing religious

attire. The ACLU cites a case reported by ADC that veiled girls have been rejected access to school

because of their veil which the school claimed it as violating the school’s dress code. Also, the ACLU cites

from the Washington Post and ESPN that veiled girls have been banned from certain extracurricular
 Ghaibeh 8

activities, such as sports. The ACLU adds that veiled women have been denied the right to wear their veils

in jail and in the courthouse. Also, veiled women have been denied access to swimming pools.24 These are

just a few of the many cases of discriminatory acts against veiled women in America.

According to an article by AFP, during Barack Obama’s Democratic campaign, two Muslim women

wearing headscarves were forbidden from appearing in front of the camera. Therefore, the Council on

American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has requested an apology from Obama for the women and would like to

see an end to the antagonistic feelings in the United States towards Muslims. CAIR is one of the most

influential organizations for the civil rights of Muslims in the United States. Obama has apologized.

However, the one of the Muslim women, Hebba Aref, has felt that Obama’s volunteers do not want Obama

to be associated with Muslims or Muslim supporters. This situation has occurred in Detroit, Michigan,

which has one of America’s largest Muslim communities. It was also noted that the other Muslim women,

Shimaa Abdelfadeel, has said that the volunteers told her that no one with any head coverings, such as

baseball caps, was allowed to appear behind Obama on camera and that the rule had nothing to do with her

religion. Also, the Obama campaign has explained that the volunteers were not instructed to request that the

women with headscarves be moved to prevent appearing on camera, and the campaign has shown photos

from other events with Obama in which women with headscarves were shown.25 It appears that Obama has

just been fearful of Americans thinking he is Muslim or is associated with Muslims because he wanted to

win the election, and many Americans still had anti-Islamic sentiment since the September 11th attack. The

fact that the volunteers claimed to have forbidden anyone with a head covering to appear behind Obama as

the news article explains does not seem believable.

An article by Viorst, “The Muslims of France” from Foreign Affairs, explains how Islam became the

second largest religion in France due to the large number of North African Muslim immigrants in the 1960s.

Some of the reasons why France’s Muslim population increased so much since include high birth rates and

illegal entrants. In the few years before 1996, France suffered unemployment problems, which a

disproportionate amount of Muslims suffered from and which the National Front blamed the Muslims for.26
 Ghaibeh 9

A BBC article from 2005 cited statistics from the National Institute for Statistics and Economic

Studies as well as the French government that out of France’s 62.3 million, five to six million (or 8-9.6%)

are Muslim. Also, out of all the European states, France has the highest number of Muslims.27 I decided to

choose France for the topic of discrimination because of this fact that France has the greatest number of

Muslims out of the European states in addition to the fact that France is in the process of implementing

additional laws involving the ban of the Muslim headscarf.

However, Sebian 2007 article notes that of the 3.5-5 million Muslims in France, which was 6-8.5%

of the state’s population, a minimum of 2 million actually have citizenship. French law does not allow

distinguishing the people in their country according to religious faith. Therefore, no accurate statistics on

the French Muslim population exists.28 While these statistical estimates are for the general Muslim

population, we can imagine how much harder it may be to find statistics for Muslim women who wear the

veil.

Human Rights First has written that in many areas of Europe and North America, violence against

Muslims occurs daily. There is a long history of discrimination, prejudice, and intolerance, which has

increased in recent history, especially after 9/11. Prejudice in the United States stem from acts of terror,

such as 9/11. In France, Human Rights First has cited information from the non-governmental organization,

Collectif Contre l’Islamophobie en France, which claimed that discrimination (including violence) toward

Muslims has risen by 20 percent in 2007 from 2005 and 2006. However, Human Rights First continues to

explain that there is an inadequate amount of statistics on discrimination and violence against Muslims.29

This is for Muslims overall. There is an even greater inadequacy of statistics on discrimination and violence

against veiled Muslim women.

Also, Human Rights First explains that discriminatory acts against Muslims are sometimes

categorized as acts against different races rather than acts against Muslims. Some African-Americans may

be Muslim, for example. So, some investigators may report an act of discrimination against an African-

American without mentioning the fact that they were Muslim or that the act of discrimination had anti-
 Ghaibeh 10

Muslim sentiments behind it. However, researching is currently being conducted on discrimination against

Muslims.30

Human Rights First cited statistics from the Commission Nationale Consultative des Droits de

l’Homme that in 2007 there were 707 racist offenses, 23.5% less than it was in 2006. Total number of racist

offenses declined by nine percent. However, people from North Africa, who are usually Muslim, accounted

for approximately 68 percent of racist violence and 60 percent of racist threats.31

A 2010 article in the Otago Daily Times cites information from a study, “Are French Muslims

Really Discriminated Against In Their Own Country?” explaining that French Muslims experience

discrimination because of their religion rather than their ethnicity. The study found that Muslims were 2.5

times less likely to hear back from someone after applying for work than Christians were in France. This

discrimination against Muslims affects their standard of living.32 While these statistics are for the general

Muslim population, we can imagine how much harder it may be for Muslim women who wear the veil,

which is like a big sign saying they are Muslim.

The “Muslims of France” 1996 article explains that the Interior Ministry believes there are about

15,000 high school girls who wore a headscarf out of about 300,000 Muslims high school girls in France,

but the Education Ministry believes these headscarved girls are more like 2,000. The numbers of the

headscarved girls who decided not to go to school are unknown, however. The debate of the headscarves in

public schools began in 1989 when a few headscarved teenage girls were expelled from school in Creil,

France, because their headscarves were a religious symbol. Negotiations regarding this issue continued for

a few years. In 1994, the French government allowed students to wear religious symbols as long as they

were discreet. This seemed to allow the Christian cross or the Jewish kippa, but these things had to be

interpreted by each school. Arguments continued on.33

According to Elaine Sciolino’s article of the New York Times, (former) French president Jacques

Chirac decided he would like to ban the wearing of the Muslim headscarf, grand Christian crosses, and

Jewish skullcaps in public schools in 2003. Chirac emphasized the tradition of secularism in France. He
 Ghaibeh 11

explained his belief in preserving France’s secularist values and his fear in the loss of secularism. Chirac

believes there is no place for religious symbols in state schools. He would like to see a ban on obvious

religious symbols. His ban does not include unnoticeable religious symbols. Chirac also would like a law

forbidding patients the ability to deny treatment from a physician of the opposite sex. Sciolino has

explained that the greatest debate and sentiment to the banning of religious symbols pertains to the wearing

of the Islamic veil.34

Sciolino includes a quote by Chirac: “All the children of France, whatever their background,

whatever their origin, whatever their belief, are daughters and sons of the republic.”35 This statement was

probably made for political reasons in hope of unifying the country. Sciolino adds that the majority of

people in France view the Islamic veil as something that challenges political stability in the nation.

However, there have been some teachers who secretly allowed their students to wear the veil. Also, some

leaders from Christian and Jewish communities have criticized the ban of the Islamic veil. Sciolino has also

included an opinion poll from the CSA Institute, which was published in the French newspaper Le Parisien,

in her New York Times article explaining that 69 percent of France’s population support the banning of the

Islamic veil whereas in October the percentage was 55. Seventy-five percent of right-wing voters and 66

percent of left-wing voters support this ban.36 Therefore, it appears that the majority of France does not

support the wearing of the veil.

In 2004, France implemented a law that forbade the wearing of the headscarf in public schools. This

ban respects France’s historical decision to separate church from state.37 But how is a headscarved student

affecting or influencing the government? How does the wearing of the headscarf by these students change

France’s secularist values?

According to Henley’s article in the Guardian, Chirac views the veil as “something aggressive”.

The people and the government of France support the ban of the veil in order to protect secularism from

what they believe is a militant Islam.38 Unfortunately, French non-Muslims misunderstand the Muslims in

their country of whom many are born in France or trying to assimilate into the country.
 Ghaibeh 12

Most Christians probably do not feel it is necessary to wear grand crosses. The kippa is not required

in the holy book of the Jewish people. But Muslims believe they are required to cover themselves with a

veil because of a couple verses from the Kuran, the holy book for Muslims, concerning the veil. The

following quotation is from Abdallah Yousuf Ali’s interpretation of the Kuran:

“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that

they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they

should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty...” (Kuran, chapter 24, verse 31, as

interpreted by Ali). There is a footnote in Ali’s interpretation of the Kuran regarding the words “beauty and

ornaments” from the Kuranic verse above. The following is part of the footnote: “Zinata means both natural

beauty and artificial ornaments. I think both are implied here, but mainly the former. The women is asked

not to make a display of her figure or appear in undress…” (Ali, footnote 2985).

There is another verse in the Kuran regarding the veil. It talks about the requirement of the veil for

all Muslim women. Here is Ali’s interpretation of it: “O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the

believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad)....” (Kuran, as

interpreted by Ali, chapter 33, verse 59). There are several footnotes in Ali’s interpretation of the Kuran to

further explain this verse. The footnote explaining the part about the believing women says: “This is for all

Muslim women, those of the Prophet’s household, as well as the others...” (Ali, footnote 3764). Another

footnote by Ali explains the part about outer garments mentioned in the verse. It says: “Jilbabb, plural

jalabib: an outer garment: a long gown covering the whole body, or a cloak covering the neck and bosom.”

(Ali, footnote 3765).39 Muslims believe their women must wear the veil due to these verses and

interpretations from the Kuran. Therefore, it is understandable that the ban of the veil could create much

discontent among Muslims. It is also unfortunate that the state of France fails to recognize how important it

is for Muslims to be able to wear the veil.

a,b
Zinat and Jilbab are the root forms of the Arabic terms used in the Kuranic verses.
 Ghaibeh 13

Dr. An-Na’im explains that Muslims believe the Kuran is the literal word of God, and the Sunna are

records of the behaviors of the prophet Muhammad in order to explain how Muslims should behave in

Islam. Muslims believe it is forbidden to debate about anything from the Kuran, but Muslims may debate

about Sunna, which was recorded a couple hundred years after Muhammad’s death. Many Muslims believe

the Sunna recorded by Bukhari or Muslim are sahih, or authentic. However, there is much controversy over

Sunna in general. Debates over the interpretations of Sunna continue to this day. Muslims feel they cannot

dispute religious law, or sharia, without the basis of Islamic literature.40

However, according to Erlanger of the New York Times International, a Muslim leader in France

named Hassen Chalghoumi views the burqa as a form of extremism. He sees the burqa as a sign of

inequality and believes it has no basis in Islam or in the Kuran. He understands the reason France is

interested in banning the burqa. He believes the burqa cuts French Muslim women from French society.41

Therefore, there are different interpretations of Islamic jurisprudence. Not all Muslims agree with the need

to cover the face. Chalghoumi seems to understands Sarkozy’s point of view.

France’s discriminatory acts against veiled women involve several types. Innovative Minds of the

UK described additional difficulties for veiled Muslim women in France. Not only are headscarved females

expelled from public schools, but in 2003 headscarved women became banned from marrying with their

headscarves on in French city halls. France does not recognize religious weddings. Also, in 2003 the

French bank Societe Generale has turned away a Muslim woman for not taking off her headscarf when

asked to. Sarkozy proposed in 2003 that Muslim women become forbidden from receiving an ID or

passport without taking off their headscarves. Also, Chirac made sure that Muslim women who prefer a

female doctor would be forbidden from requesting one, meaning a lack of medical treatment. In addition,

Chirac made it possible for private businesses to fire their Muslim employees if they refuse to remove their

headscarves. In 2003, France’s Justice Minister exchanged a headscarved woman from being a juror hoping

to ensure a fair trial in a murder case. In 2002, a Muslim girl from Britain from forbidden from playing

sports in France because her headscarf. In 2004, a mayor has banned fashion shows for including
 Ghaibeh 14

headscarves.42 This is just a brief review of the discrimination towards veiled Muslims that goes on in

France. Unfortunately, many aspects of these womens’ lives are affected.

According to an article by the BBC, in 2008 a woman who has been living in France since 2000 with

her husband and three children, all of whom have French citizenship, was rejected citizenship because of the

way she wears her veil, which only permitted her eyes to be shown. The French government does not

believe she is capable of co-existing with the French people harmoniously. BBC continued to explain that

they viewed her as a “radical” Muslim, one who is overly subservient to the men in her family. She has

tried to request citizenship in 2005, too. But the government has refused to think that she could assimilate

into France.43

According to the BBC article “French pool bans a woman from swimming due to her “burkini”,

which is an Muslim woman’s attempt for very conservative swimwear that went along with her Muslim

values.44 How could this women’s conservative swimwear actually harm anyone? How come she cannot be

allowed to dress the way she wants at a swimming pool? Perhaps other people felt uncomfortable with a

Muslim around.

According to an article in The Guardian newspaper of the United Kingdom by Chrisafis, French

president Nicolas Sarkozy has said in 2009 that full veils and face coverings, which he believes are signs of

debasement, are not welcome in France. The government might later enforce a law forbidding the covering

of the face. They believe that veils that just allow the eyes to be shown could be threatening to the nation’s

secularist values and gender equality. Sarkozy does not think the burqa is a sign of religiosity but rather a

sign of debasement and submission. He believes this is not a religious issue but rather an issue of the

freedom and dignity of women. He regards the burqa as imprisonment and something that restricts women

from social interactions. Sarkozy hopes to encourage freedom for women in France by banning the burqa.45

However, he may not understand how important it is for Muslim women to abide by certain religious

interpretations supporting the burqa.

 Ghaibeh 15

According to an article in The Guardian by Davies, if any veiled women covers her face in public,

she will have to pay a fine. Sarkozy believes the veil that includes the covering of the face does not fit in

with French values. It is guessed that nearly 2000 women in France wear the burqa.46 We do not know yet

if this ban will pass successfully. But some Muslims will become unhappy about it.

The BBC claims that in 2010 a niqab-wearing women in France was fined for driving. The reason

for the fine was that her vision was limited, a very dangerous thing for drivers.47 The police who had fined

this woman appear to have had a good justification. This case may not seem like a discriminatory act to

some but may seem like a discriminatory act to others. Whether or not it should be considered

discriminatory depends on how the veil was worn around the eyes, whether it allowed the woman to see

clearly or not. The wearing of the veil differs among women.

According to a BBC article, the top French administrators have warned the government against the

implementation of a total ban of the burqa saying it violates the French Constitution and the European

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. They believe that a ban could

work in some places though.48 Article 1 of French Constitution of 1958 states: “France shall be an

indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic. It shall ensure the equality of all citizens before the

law, without distinction of origin, race or religion. It shall respect all beliefs. It shall be organised on a

decentralised basis.”49 Also, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen Article 1 states: “Men are

born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be based only on considerations of the

common good.”50 However, France appears to ignore these articles, focusing more on the 1905’s law on the

separation of church and state as a excuse for their banning of the veil, which could be just discrimination in

disguise.

There, have been theories regarding reasons why France is interested in the banning of the Islamic

veil. Abdo cited information from Baines that the French government is trying to encourage assimilation,

reduce sexism, counter Islamic fundamentalism though the French government misunderstands Islam and
 Ghaibeh 16

has false ideas of Islam.51 There is most likely to be a high level of prejudiced attitudes by the French

people towards Muslims in France.

Zeiss translated an article by Gelie from Le Figaro that described Obama’s thoughts about Sarkozy’s

desire to ban the facial veil. Obama disagrees with Sarkozy and believes women should have the freedom

to dress how they like. Included in the article was a quotation by Obama: “It is important for Western

countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit, for instance, by

dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear…We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion

behind the pretence of liberalism."52 Obama’s stance on the veil is clearly different than Sarkozy’s stance.

Each of the two presidents have clearly different views about the veil. Muslims in the United States may be

happier than Muslims in France after hearing these words from Obama. The United States does seem to

accept the veil much more than France. However, discrimination still occurs in the United States in

different ways, such as employment discrimination, etc.

In addition, it is noted in the article that Obama has a veiled Muslim woman working in the White

House with him.53 Even if many Americans, including Americans in the White House, may have certain

prejudices towards Muslims, there are Muslims that work in the United States government. This fact may

help many American Muslims have faith that their country is acting justly with them.

In the Observers section of France 24, it is noted that Obama also said: “The United States

government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab and to punish those

who would deny it.” The same site claims he added, “I reject the view of some in the West that a woman

who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an

education is denied equality.”54 Fortunately, veiled Muslims are allowed to receive an education in the

United States.

President Sarkozy would like a banning of the facial veil in public places, such as hospitals, schools,

and courts this May of 2010. Justifications for a ban of the veil in public places include combating fraud,

security, and satisfying the needs of certain public services. However, France’s highest administrative body,
 Ghaibeh 17

the State Council, warns that this ban would be unconstitutional and go against European laws on human

rights.55 If France implements this law banning the facial veil, many Muslims in France and outside of

France will be unhappy.

Veiled Muslim women in both France and the United States experience general discrimination, such

as workers’ discrimination or sports discrimination. However, the nation of France has actual laws banning

the wearing of the veil in public schools. On the other hand, veiled Muslims are allowed much more

freedom in the United States. There are no actual laws banning women from wearing the Islamic veil.

Veiled women are allowed to go to school or attend university courses in the United States. They are

allowed to become lawyers or hold government positions. However, the many discreet, hidden cases of

discrimination should not be ignored. Discrimination towards these women in the United States exists, but

because there are no laws banning the wearing of the Islamic veil, these cases of discrimination are much

more covert and hard to notice for many people. Worker discrimination is often denied, for example. Or

the employers often give false reasons for the firing of these women in order to protect themselves. On the

other hand, France has direct laws banning the veil and is in the process of publicly debating an additional

law to ban the facial veil. In France, the banning of the veil is made very overt and public. America makes

it appear that it does not have a problem with Muslims by allowing the headscarf. Not all Muslims have

problems with discrimination in the United States regarding the wearing of the veil. However, in France all

Muslims are affected by the law banning the wearing of the veil in schools, for example. Either way, the

people’s sentiments towards Muslims may be the same in both countries. France may experience more

discontent among its Muslim communities though because Muslims believe the veil is ordered to them in

the Kuran. The Jewish kippa and a large Christian cross are not required in the sense that the veil is

required among Muslims.

There needs to be more research conducted regarding cases or rates of discrimination among veiled

Muslim women in both the United States and France. Unfortunately, many cases go unreported or are

classified as other types of discrimination, such as ethnic discrimination rather than religious. Numbers
 Ghaibeh 18

cannot be determined accurately because of these many cases that go unreported. It is very difficult at the

present time to research this information. It is possible that Muslims from other cultures prefer keeping

their troubles private or not making their problems public (it could be embarrassing to people of certain

cultures). On the other hand, there may be many veiled women in the United States who have never

experienced any sort of discrimination. But we cannot know these numbers exactly. There are not enough

studies done on the subject to have a fair estimate of the rates of discrimination against these women.

One of the reason things worked out the way they did is that France decided to separate religion

from state in 1905. This separation of church and state was used as an excuse for the banning of the veil.

The ban was highly facilitated with this excuse. On the other hand, the United States had a history of people

seeking religious freedom. The first amendment of the United States promotes religious freedom. This

amendment is a good reason why there is no ban on the veil in the United States today. There is

discrimination towards veiled women in the United States, however, such as workers’ discrimination. Just

because there is no direct ban does not mean there is no discrimination, which is a critical fact that the

public needs to understand. This sort of discrimination is much more difficult to detect.

If the law of separation of church and state in France was in 1905, why were the symbols outlawed

much later? One of the most probable reasons is that the prevalence of Muslims in France has increased.

With an increased prevalence and growth rate of Muslims, France may feel threatened. The French, who

are mostly Christian, would probably like to remain the majority.

In a way laïcité is good because it might prevent conflict between people of different religious faiths.

If religious symbols are made hidden and less noticeable, then maybe the French people would see fewer

differences between each other. If they see fewer differences between each other, then there is a greater

chance for the Muslims or people of other faiths to integrate well into the French nation as well as a chance

of a reduction in discriminatory acts against people of different faiths. However, this attempt to unify the

people of different faiths is very difficult to achieve because of the Muslims’ belief that the wearing of the

veil stems from the holy book, which means they cannot ignore the veil.
 Ghaibeh 19

It seems that America improved over recent years because of the rise of CAIR. The rise of CAIR

means that there is research done on cases of discrimination against Muslims. The rise of CAIR also means

that Muslims have a place to go when discrimination happens to them, which could involve the seeking of a

lawyer in order to protect civil rights. There is also a gradual increase and beginning in the amount of

research going on in general in the subject of discrimination against Muslims, including the discrimination

of veiled women by others. If education about discriminatory practices increases, it will become easier for

discrimination to decrease once more people are aware of the problem and speak out about it.

The United States has a long history of racism, and it is progressing in general over the centuries in

their acts towards other ethnicities or peoples. However, this progression may not be the case for Muslims.

The event of 9/11 affected both American and French Muslims negatively. Racial attitudes towards

Muslims resulted among many people in both nations, and discrimination towards Muslims is still prevalent.

The United States probably was especially affected by 9/11. CAIR has reported an general increase in

discrimination against Muslims over the years. However, veiled Muslim women in either nation do not

deserve to be discriminated against for the acts of the male religious fanatics who committed the crimes.

Nor do they deserve to be discriminated against for any other reasons, such as reasons that existed before

9/11. At the moment the numbers of Muslims are increasing in both nations, and much more work needs to

be done to prevent and end discrimination towards these veiled women.

 Ghaibeh 20

Endnotes

BBC. “The Islamic Veil Across Europe.” April 22, 2010. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5414098.stm
1

(accessed April 25, 2010).

2
Amir Muhammad. “History: The 1900s.” http://www.muslimsinamerica.org/index.php?
option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=28 (accessed April 25, 2010).
3
Jim Garamone. “Islam Growing in America, US Military.” U.S. Department of Defense:
American Forces Press Service. October 4, 2001. http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=44689
(accessed April 18, 2010).
4
Religious Tolerance. “How Many Muslims Are in the U.S. and the Rest of the World?” 2002.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_numb.htm (accessed May 3, 2010).
5
U.S. Census. 2010. http://www.census.gov/ (accessed April 18, 2010).
6
U.S. Constitution. 1995-2010. http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1 (accessed May 3,
2010).
7
U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. “Teaching with Documents: The Civil Rights
Act of 1964 and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.”
http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/civil-rights-act/ (accessed May 3, 2010).
8
Aminah B. McCloud. “American Muslim Women and U.S. Society”. Journal of Law and
Religion, Vol. 12, No. 1 (1995-1996), pp. 51-59, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1051609 (accessed April 16,
2010).
9
McCloud, 51-59.
10
McCloud, 51-59.
11
McCloud, 51-59.
12
McCloud, 51-59.
13
BBC News. “US Muslim Ordered to Lift Veil.” 6 June 2003.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2970514.stm (accessed April 18, 2010).
14
Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States.”
2007. http://www.cair.com/Portals/0/pdf/2007-Civil-Rights-Report.pdf (accessed April 22, 2010).
15
Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States.”
2007.
16
Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States
1999.” 2010. http://www.cair.com/CivilRights/CivilRightsReports/1999Report.aspx (accessed May 3,
 Ghaibeh 21

2010).
17
New York City Commission on Human Rights. “Discrimination Against Muslims, Arabs, and
South Asians in New York City Since 9/11.” Summer 2003. http://nyc.gov/html/cchr/pdf/sur_report.pdf
(accessed April 18, 2010).
18
Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States:
Seeking Full Inclusion.” 2009. http://www.cair.com/Portals/0/pdf/CAIR-2009-Civil-Rights-Report.pdf
(accessed April 22, 2010).
19
Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States:
Unequal Protection.” 2005. http://www.cair-net.org/PDF/2005CivilRightsReport.pdf (accessed April 22,
2010).
20
Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States.”
2008. http://www.cair.com/Portals/0/pdf/civilrights2008.pdf (accessed April 22, 2010).
21
Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States:
Seeking Full Inclusion.” 2009.
22
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation’s Women’s Rights Project. “Discrimination Against
Muslim Women.” November 2008.
(http://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/womensrights/discriminationagainstmuslimwomen11.08.pdf)
(Accessed March 28, 2010).
23
Alyssa E. Rippy & Elana Newman, unpublished raw data, 2008, copy on file with the Women’s
Rights Project.
24
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation’s Women’s Rights Project.
25
AFP via Google. “Muslims Decry Banning of Hijab-Wearing Women at Obama Event.” June 19,
2008. (http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hBq0ntgycm19uK7rXfX0P-oJ5Fgw) (accessed March 28,
2010).
26
Milton Viorst. “The Muslims of France.” Foreign Affairs. Vol. 75, No. 5. Pp. 78-96 (September-
October 1996). http://0-www.jstor.org.skyline.ucdenver.edu/stable/pdfplus/20047745.pdf (accessed April
24, 2010).
27
BBC News. “Muslims in Europe: Country Guide.” 23 December 2005.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4385768.stm (accessed April 18, 2010).
28
Elizabeth Sebian. “Islam in France.” Euro-Islam: News and Analysis on Islam in Europe and the
United States. Edited by Jennifer Selby. 2007. http://www.euro-islam.info/country-profiles/france/
(accessed April 26, 2010).
29
Human Rights First. “Violence Against Muslims.” 2008 Hate Crime Survey.
http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/pdf/fd/08/fd-080924-muslims-web.pdf (accessed April 18, 2010).
30
Human Rights First. “Violence Against Muslims.” 2008 Hate Crime Survey.
 Ghaibeh 22

31
Human Rights First. “2008 Hate Crime Survey: Muslims v. Official Statistics on Violence
Against Muslims.” 2008. http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/discrimination/reports.aspx?
s=muslims&p=officialstats (accessed April 25, 2010).
32
Otago Daily Times. “Study Shows French Muslims Hit by Religious Bias.” March 26, 2010.
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/world/99211/study-shows-french-muslims-hit-religious-bias (accessed
April 25, 2010).
33
Milton Viorst.
34
Elaine Sciolino. “Chirac wants religious attire banned in public schools.” The New York Times.
December 17, 2003. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/27/international/europe/27france.html) (accessed
April 15, 2010).
35
Elaine Sciolino.
36
Elaine Sciolino.
37
BBC. “French Scarf Ban Comes Into Force.” September 2, 2004.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3619988.stm (accessed April 15, 2010).
38
Jon Henley. “Something aggressive about veils, says Chirac.” The Guardian. 6 December 2003.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/06/france.jonhenley (accessed April 22, 2010).
39
Abdallah Yousef Ali (translator and editor). The Glorious Kur’an. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar Al-Fikir.
40
Abdullahi An-Na’im. “The Rights of Women and International Law in the Muslim Context.”
HeinOnline’s Law Journal Library: 9 Whittier Law Review 491 (1987-1988).
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?
collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/whitlr9&div=39&id=&page= (accessed April 18, 2010).
41
Steven Erlanger. “For a French Imam, Islam’s True Enemy Is Radicalism.” New York Times
International. 13 February 2010. A5.
42
Innovative Minds. “Protest French Hijab Ban.” January 14, 2004.
http://inminds.co.uk/frenchhijab-ban.html#t1 (accessed April 25, 2010).
43
BBC . “France Rejects Veiled Muslim Wife.” July 12, 2008.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7503757.stm (accessed on April 14, 2010).
44
BBC. “French Pool Bans ‘Burkini’ Swim.” August, 12, 2009.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8197917.stm (accessed March 29, 2010).
45
Angelique Chrisafis. “Nicolas Sarkozy Says Islamic Veils Are Not Welcome in France.” The
Guardian. 22 June 2009. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/22/islamic-veils-sarkozy-speech-
france (accessed April 14, 2010).
46
Lizzy Davies. “Full Veil Not Welcome in France, says Sarkozy.” The Guardian. January 14, 2010.
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/14/sarkozy-full-veil-ban) (accessed April 15, 2010).
 Ghaibeh 23

47
BBC. “French Police Fine Muslim Driver for Wearing Veil.” April 23, 2010.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8641070.stm (accessed April 25, 2010).
48
BBC. “French PM Advised Against Total Islamic Veil Ban.” 30 March 2010.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8595589.stm (accessed May 3, 2010).
49
French National Assembly. “Constitution of October 4, 1958.” http://www.assemblee-
nationale.fr/english/8ab.asphttp://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/english/8ab.asp (accessed May 3, 2010).
50
Ministry of Foreign Affairs (France). “The Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen.”
1789. http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/article_imprim.php3?id_article=1505 (accessed May 3, 2010).
51
Aliah Abdo. “The Legal Staus of Hijab in the United States: A Look at the Sociopolitical
Influences on the Legal Right to Wear the Muslim Headscarf.” University of California Hastings College of
the Law: Hastings Race and Poverty Law Journal. Summer 2008. http://0-
www.lexisnexis.com.skyline.ucdenver.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?
docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T9183295085&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlK
ey=29_T9183295090&cisb=22_T9183295088&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=292706&docNo=2
(accessed April 26, 2010).
52
Philippe Gelie. “Obama Calls France Out On Banning Muslim Veil.” Translated by L. McKenzie
Zeiss. Le Figaro. June 5, 2009. http://worldmeets.us/lefigaro0000274.shtml (accessed May 3, 2010).
53
Philippe Gelie.
54
France 24: The Observers. “Obama Tackles the French on the Hijab.” June 5, 2009.
http://observers.france24.com/en/content/20090605-obama-tackles-french-hijab-cairo-speech-france
(accessed April 18, 2010).
55
BBC. “The Islamic Veil Across Europe.”

Bibliography
 Ghaibeh 24

Abdo, Aliah. “The Legal Staus of Hijab in the United States: A Look at the Sociopolitical Influences on the
Legal Right to Wear the Muslim Headscarf.” University of California Hastings College of the Law:
Hastings Race and Poverty Law Journal. Summer 2008. http://0-
www.lexisnexis.com.skyline.ucdenver.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?
docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T9183295085&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resu
ltsUrlKey=29_T9183295090&cisb=22_T9183295088&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=292706&d
ocNo=2 (accessed April 26, 2010).

AFP via Google. “Muslims Decry Banning of Hijab-Wearing Women at Obama Event.” June 19, 2008.
(http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hBq0ntgycm19uK7rXfX0P-oJ5Fgw) (accessed March 28,
2010).

Ali, Abdallah Yousef (translator and editor). The Glorious Kur’an. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar Al-Fikir.

American Civil Liberties Union Foundation’s Women’s Rights Project. “Discrimination Against Muslim
Women.” November 2008.
(http://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/womensrights/discriminationagainstmuslimwomen11.08.pdf)
(accessed March 28, 2010)

An-Na’im, Abdullahi. “The Rights of Women and International Law in the Muslim Context.”
HeinOnline’s Law Journal Library: 9 Whittier Law Review 491 (1987-1988).
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?
collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/whitlr9&div=39&id=&page= (accessed April 18, 2010).

Baines, Cynthia DeBula. L'Affaire des Foulards - Discrimination, or the Price of a Secular Public Education
System?, 29 Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 303, 304 (1996).

BBC. “French Police Fine Muslim Driver for Wearing Veil.” April 23, 2010.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8641070.stm (accessed April 25, 2010).

BBC . “France Rejects Veiled Muslim Wife.” July 12, 2008.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7503757.stm (accessed on April 14, 2010).

BBC. “French Scarf Ban Comes Into Force.” September 2, 2004. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3619988.stm
(accessed April 15, 2010).

BBC. “French PM Advised Against Total Islamic Veil Ban.” 30 March 2010.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8595589.stm (accessed May 3, 2010).

BBC. “French Pool Bans ‘Burkini’ Swim.” August, 12, 2009.

(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8197917.stm (accessed March 29, 2010).

BBC. “The Islamic Veil Across Europe.” April 22, 2010. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5414098.stm
(accessed April 25, 2010).

BBC News. “Muslims in Europe: Country Guide.” 23 December 2005.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4385768.stm (accessed April 18, 2010).

BBC News. “US Muslim Ordered to Lift Veil.” 6 June 2003.

 Ghaibeh 25

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2970514.stm (accessed April 18, 2010).

CAIR News Release (Nov 8, 1995) indicates this incident was reported in the Dallas Morning News and
the Fort Worth Star-Telegram newspapers (Oct, 1995).

Chrisafis, Angelique. “Nicolas Sarkozy Says Islamic Veils Are Not Welcome in France.” The Guardian.
22 June 2009. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/22/islamic-veils-sarkozy-speech-france
(accessed April 14, 2010).

“Collections and Stories of American Muslims (CSAM).” 2005. Rushdan.com.

Commission Nationale Consultative des Droits de l’Homme. La Lutte Contre le Racisme et la

Xenophobie :
Rapport d’activite 2007, Paris : 2008,
http://lesrapports.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/BRP/084000167/0000.pdf.

Council on American Islamic Relations. “American Muslims: One Year After 9/11.”

Council on American-Islamic Relations, CAIR Action Alert. “JC Penney Store Fires Muslim Woman for
Refusing to Remove Head Scarf”, Alert #111 (Aug 5, 1996).

Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States 1999.”
2010. http://www.cair.com/CivilRights/CivilRightsReports/1999Report.aspx (accessed May 3,
2010).

Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States: Unequal
Protection.” 2005. http://www.cair-net.org/PDF/2005CivilRightsReport.pdf (accessed April 22,
2010).

Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States.” 2007.
http://www.cair.com/Portals/0/pdf/2007-Civil-Rights-Report.pdf (accessed April 22, 2010).

Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States.” 2008.
http://www.cair.com/Portals/0/pdf/civilrights2008.pdf (accessed April 22, 2010).

Council on American Islamic Relations. “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States: Seeking
Full Inclusion.” 2009. http://www.cair.com/Portals/0/pdf/CAIR-2009-Civil-Rights-Report.pdf
(accessed April 22, 2010).

Davies, Lizzy. “Full Veil Not Welcome in France, says Sarkozy.” The Guardian. January 14, 2010.
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/14/sarkozy-full-veil-ban) (accessed April 15, 2010).

Erlanger, Steven. “For a French Imam, Islam’s True Enemy Is Radicalism.” New York Times
International. 13 February 2010. A5.

ESPN. “An Angry Backlash.” Sept. 24, 2004. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=1887618.

Finn, Peter. Va. Hotel's Policy Angers Muslims, Wash Post D01 (Apr 13, 1996); Michael D. Shear, Hotel
Owner Apologizes, Wash Post B06 (Apr 19, 1996).
 Ghaibeh 26

France 24: The Observers. “Obama Tackles the French on the Hijab.” June 5, 2009.
http://observers.france24.com/en/content/20090605-obama-tackles-french-hijab-cairo-speech-france
(accessed April 18, 2010).

French National Assembly. “Constitution of October 4, 1958.” http://www.assemblee-

nationale.fr/english/8ab.asphttp://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/english/8ab.asp (accessed May 3, 2010).

Garamone, Jim. “Islam Growing in America, US Military.” U.S. Department of Defense: American
Forces Press Service. October 4, 2001. http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=44689
(accessed April 18, 2010).

Gelie, Philippe. “Obama Calls France Out On Banning Muslim Veil.” Translated by L. McKenzie Zeiss.
Le Figaro. June 5, 2009. http://worldmeets.us/lefigaro0000274.shtml (accessed May 3, 2010).

“Hearn v. Muskogee School District”, No. 6:03-cv-00598 (E.D. Okla. filed Oct. 28, 2003). (Mar. 31, 2004)
available at http://www.adc.org/index.php?id=2183&no_cache=1&sword_list[]=headscarf.

Henley, Jon. “Something aggressive about veils, says Chirac.” The Guardian. 6 December 2003.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/06/france.jonhenley (accessed April 22, 2010).

Human Rights First. “Violence Against Muslims.” 2008 Hate Crime Survey.
http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/pdf/fd/08/fd-080924-muslims-web.pdf (accessed April 18, 2010).

Human Rights First. “2008 Hate Crime Survey: Muslims v. Official Statistics on Violence Against
Muslims.” 2008. http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/discrimination/reports.aspx?
s=muslims&p=officialstats (accessed April 25, 2010).

Innovative Minds. “Protest French Hijab Ban.” January 14, 2004. http://inminds.co.uk/frenchhijab-
ban.html#t1 (accessed April 25, 2010).

“Khatib v. County of Orange”, et al., No. 8:07-cv-01012 (C.D. Cal. filed Sept. 4, 2007).

“Medina v. County of San Bernardino”, et al., No. 5:07-cv-01600 (C.D. Cal. filed Dec. 5, 2007). ACLU
press release and settlement agreement available at www.aclu.org/muslimwomen.

McCloud, Aminah B. “American Muslim Women and U.S. Society”. Journal of Law and Religion, Vol.
12, No. 1 (1995-1996), pp. 51-59,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1051609 (accessed April 16, 2010).

Ministry of Foreign Affairs (France). “The Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen.” 1789.
http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/article_imprim.php3?id_article=1505 (accessed May 3, 2010).

Muhammad, Amir. “History: The 1900s.”

http://www.muslimsinamerica.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=28
(accessed April 25, 2010).

New York City Commission on Human Rights. “Discrimination Against Muslims, Arabs, and South
Asiansin New York City Since 9/11.” Summer 2003.
http://nyc.gov/html/cchr/pdf/sur_report.pdf (accessed April 18, 2010).
 Ghaibeh 27

Otago Daily Times. “Study Shows French Muslims Hit by Religious Bias.” March 26, 2010.
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/world/99211/study-shows-french-muslims-hit-religious-bias (accessed
April 25, 2010).

Pesce, Carolyn. In Minn. a Crime of Cover-Up, USA Today 3A (Oct 5, 1994).

Religious Tolerance. “How Many Muslims Are in the U.S. and the Rest of the World?” 2002.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_numb.htm (accessed May 3, 2010).

Rippy, Alyssa E. & Elana Newman, unpublished raw data, 2008, copy on file with the Women’s Rights
Project.

Sciolino, Elaine. “Chirac wants religious attire banned in public schools.” The New York Times.
December 17, 2003. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/27/international/europe/27france.html)
(accessed April 15, 2010).

Sebian, Elizabeth. “Islam in France.” Euro-Islam: News and Analysis on Islam in Europe and the United
States. Edited by Jennifer Selby. 2007. http://www.euro-islam.info/country-profiles/france/
(accessed April 26, 2010).

U.S. Census. 2010. http://www.census.gov/ (accessed April 18, 2010).

U.S. Constitution. 1995-2010. http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1 (accessed May 3, 2010).

U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. “Teaching with Documents: The Civil Rights Act of
1964 and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.”
http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/civil-rights-act/ (accessed May 3, 2010).

Viorst, Milton. “The Muslims of France.” Foreign Affairs. Vol. 75, No. 5. Pp. 78-96 (September-October
1996). http://0-www.jstor.org.skyline.ucdenver.edu/stable/pdfplus/20047745.pdf (accessed April
24, 2010).

The Washington Post. “When the Rules Run Up Against Faith: Prep Athlete Wearing Muslim Clothing
Disqualified From Track Meet.” Jan. 16, 2008.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011503356.html.

The Washington Post Sunday 117 (Dec 17, 1995).