Is Hijab a Hat?

Apparently, the Navy Federal Credit Union, a Maryland bank, has a “no hats, hoods or sunglasses policy.” When a Muslim woman entered the bank two weekends ago to complete some money errands, she was asked to “do her banking in a back room” according to David Waters’ March 21st column “Under God” in The Washington Post. The Maryland Muslim was wearing hijab— modest dress, that includes a headscarf, worn by some Muslim women.

“Note to Credit Union:” wrote Waters in his response to this latest incident of hijab hassles, “A Hijab is Not a Hat.”

The Credit Union’s policy is meant to prevent robberies and identity theft, but has now put the label ‘shady’ on hijab as well. Waters points out that the Navy Federal policy does not make exceptions for Jews, Sikhs, Catholics and others who choose to cover their heads for religious reasons. Spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Ibrahim Hooper told a Post reporter, however, there has to be a way to reconcile security concerns with religious freedom.

Waters’ suggestion: common sense.

I tend to agree.

The Maryland Muslim’s bank encounter is by no means the first of its kind. A Muslim woman in Oklahoma was asked to pull her headscarf back in order to reveal her hairline for a driver’s license photo last year and declined. She was later allowed to take the photo when officials determined her face sufficed as a means of identification.

Usually, hijab-DMV squabbles and similar incidents are worked without much fuss. A compromise, like a written statement explaining the purpose of hijab, is typically enough to quell security panic attacks. When I went to get my driver’s license at a North Carolina DMV, I wrote just such a statement. It took two minutes, and I did not mind it at all. In fact, it was a chance for my DMV officer to learn something about my faith. The Muslim-woman-in-hijab and DMV photo stories are becoming so commonplace now that some DMVs do not ask for a written statement anymore, and the media seems to be getting bored of covering them.

The legal qualms about head coverings in ID photos and some public areas have not been completely settled however. Just last month Oklahoma state Rep. Rex Duncan proposed a bill to “ban all head coverings” in driver’s license photos. Duncan said this would include everything from cowboy hats to nuns’ veils. I presume hijab is safely included in that spectrum.

Luckily, Mr. Duncan’s bill did not make it through the Senate. Minnesota state Rep. Steve Gottwalt introduced a similar bill in his state, but the bill was quickly revised to allow for religious head coverings.

Anyone else seeing a pattern?

For God’s sake, let’s use common sense. The government’s concern with personal identification for security reasons is by all means legitimate. When you are responsible for 300 million plus individuals, you can not know them all. A uniform, reliable system of identification needs to be in place for everyone’s safety. However, we cannot let that system infringe on religious freedom without grave reason. Hijab and religious head coverings that do not hurt anyone and do not obscure identification do not warrant alarm.

My question is, if I decide to wear a hat, sunglasses and pop my hood on top of my hijab does that…? Yeah, that would be going too far, and I would not be one to abuse my constitutional freedoms like that!