“Four Muslim men who have accused FBI agents of putting them on a no-fly list because they refused to become informants want to pursue damages against the agents even though the travel ban has been lifted, the men’s lawyers told a federal judge [12 June 2015].
“Earlier this week the men received letters notifying them their names had been removed from the list of tens of thousands of people prohibited from flying to, from or within the United States. Three of the four – Jameel Albighah, Naveed Shinwari and Awais Sajjad – were in federal court in Manhattan to hear the arguments over a government motion to have their lawsuit against 25 FBI agents dismissed.”
Read more about this challenge here: “CAN THEY SUE: Judge to decide if Muslims put on, and then off, no fly list can seek damages“
“Every time I walk into the room, the first thought is, ‘There’s a Muslim,’ ” said Ms. [Zahra] Cheema, 25, the American-born daughter of Pakistani immigrants, describing that moment when she meets with a potential employer or argues a case in court. “I worry that essentially the hijab will override all my other merits.”
That’s from a story in The New York Times about an American lawyer’s apparel dilemma.
“Some bosses prefer not to place a woman with a head scarf in the public eye.”
The question is troubling: why should Muslim women resign themselves to be hidden from view so their religion is not an issue? Most Muslim men wear nothing identifying them to the casual observer as Muslim.
A subject of heated debate for American Muslim women is the future of this relic of the medieval past (Christian women used to cover their hair; Old Order Amish Orthodox Jewish women still do).
In Muslim majority countries, hijab (in its various permutations) is routine. In the United States, it is not.
Is hijab truly a “sign of piety” or a blatant signifier of the subordinate place of women in Islam? If the scarf is intended to demonstrate “modesty”, how does calling attention to oneself fulfill this goal?
“The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 on Monday that retailer Abercrombie & Fitch may have violated workplace discrimination law when it turned down a Muslim job applicant because she wore a hijab, even though her religious beliefs never came up in the interview,” writes Dave Jamieson in The Huffington Post.
Although Abercrombie & Fitch requires that its sales team dress “preppy” (like their merchandise), “Samantha Elauf, the job seeker at the center of the case, applied for a sales position at an Abercrombie children’s store in Oklahoma in 2008.”
Read more here: Supreme Court Rules Against Abercrombie & Fitch In Discrimination Case
United Airlines has a firestorm on its hands courtesy of a short-tempered flight attendant.
You all know the story by now: a woman in hijab was refused an unopened can of Diet Coke because, she was told, she could use it as a weapon.
What United does with the resultant uproar will speak volumes about its level of customer service.
Here’s one of the stories on the episode: Calls to Boycott United Airlines Grow After Muslim Woman Alleges Discrimination