Home » Articles » The Headscarf as Threat: A Comparison of German and U.S. Legal Discourses

The Headscarf as Threat: A Comparison of German and U.S. Legal Discourses

PDF · Robert A. Kahn · Aug-16-2012 · 40 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 417 (2007)

This Article compares how U.S. and German judges conceptualize the harm the headscarf poses to society. The examples are the 2003 Ludin case, in which the German Federal Constitutional Court held that the civil service, in the absence of state regulation, could not reject a woman from a civil service teaching position solely because she would not remove her headscarf while teaching, and State v. Freeman, in which a Florida court held that a woman could not pose for a driver’s license photograph wearing a garment (the niqab) that covered all of her face except her eyes. While judges and legal critics in both countries tended to see the headscarf as threatening, German society was more likely to see it as a symbol of political Islam, while U.S. society viewed it as a tool used by potential terrorists.




Leave a Reply

ExpressO Top 10 Law Review

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Video is now available from the Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law‘s latest symposium, This is Not a Drill: Confronting Legal Issues in the Wake of International Disasters. Watch them here.

We are pleased to announce the 2015-2016 Board of Editors.

Read the Journal’s latest issue (Vol. 47 No. 5) here.

The Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law mourns the death of its founder, Professor Harold G. Maier.

Please join us in congratulating the Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 2013-2014 Annual Award Winners.

 

Explore Other Vanderbilt Law Resources