Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Tennessee: Muslim woman forced to remove hijab for mugshot, launches $200,000 lawsuit

By

Under the Sharia, as the article below notes, “forcing an observant Muslim woman to remove her hijab in front of men who are not family is ‘humiliating and degrading.'”

America, however, is not under Sharia.

Nevertheless, Sophia Johnston has filed a lawsuit, “which seeks at least $200,000 in damages, accuses the defendants of violating her civil rights.”

Even the former President of the United States didn’t escape an unjustified mugshot as a standard part of the booking process, but this Muslim woman expects special privileges under the Sharia that she, and other Sharia-adherent mainstream Muslims, regard as above than any other law.

Sophia Johnston isn’t the first Muslim woman to sue over the removal of her hijab under similar circumstances. Other examples:

  • In 2020, a Detroit Muslim woman with a Hamas-linked CAIR lawyer sued for being made to remove hijab for a mugshot photo.
  • In 2019 in Minnesota, a Muslim woman was awarded $120,000 for having to remove her hijab for jailhouse mugshot.
  • In Dearborn in 2015, a Muslim women sued the police department for forced hijab removal as she was taken into custody.

“Cops forced Muslim woman to remove hijab for mugshot: lawsuit,” by Julia Martin, Miami Herald, August 31, 2023:

A devout Muslim woman was threatened with indefinite jail time if she didn’t take off her hijab for a booking photo in Tennessee, a new federal lawsuit says.

Forcing an observant Muslim woman to remove her hijab in front of men who are not family is “humiliating and degrading,” according to the lawsuit, which likened doing so to making a woman remove her shirt in public.

No man outside of Sophia Johnston’s family has seen her hair since she was a child — as that would go against her religious beliefs — until Aug. 23, when she was booked in Rutherford County on a six-year-old outstanding warrant for driving on a suspended license, a complaint filed Aug. 29 in Nashville federal court says.

Johnston, who is white and Black, is a proud American Muslim, she told McClatchy News on Aug. 31.

On Aug. 23, Johnston unsuccessfully pleaded with Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office deputies to allow her to keep her hijab on for her mugshot, according to the complaint. The deputies are accused of denying her request for a religious accommodation.

After an intake officer warned Johnston she’d stay in jail until she took the photo without her hijab, she saw no other choice but to comply, as she has eight children and “could not afford to be incarcerated indefinitely,” the complaint says….

Comments

  1. How many criminals hide behind the hijab? A picture that does not show the face is worthless. Is she using the hijab to hide herself from being identified for her crimes?

    • Exactly Barbara, she is not “special” because she has a rag on her head!

  2. If that is your belief you need to return to your country of origin.
    Don’t expect western countries to bow down to your dress code. You are not being respectful of the country you have chosen to settle in. You need to adopt western dress code for women and follow the laws of the land of the free. If this meets with your disapproval you should be invited to leave.
    Islam belongs in the Arab world not the Western world and I think likewise you don’t belong in the western world but belong in the Arab world with people who share your beliefs and dress code.

    • My guess is that Sophia Johnston is US-born and bred. She probably also has a fair amount of college edgymcKashun.

  3. If you don’t want to remove your headscarf for a mugshot, don’t be a criminal who has to.
    It’s very very simple.

      • And what next from the muslims;a Jihadist wearing a balaclava who refuses to take it off as it is contrary to his Jihadist beliefs?This contrived ‘islamophobia’ nonsense and this constant pandering to these muslimas with their “hijab hissy fits” has to stop.
        Police officers are supposed to take mug shots:you cannot have special exemptions using the religious discrimination trick.

        And if the muslima wears a burqa?You are kidding right?

  4. THIS should be very interesting…didn’t some Muslima complain or sue Florida for having to remove her full face covering for her driver’s license? I do not remember how that turned out, but I assume not very well for Florida.

  5. This stuff is on purpose. These women commit the crimes and then when caught, refuse to comply with orders to remove the headgear.
    Males and females are made to remove any type of hat when their mugshot is taken. The photo is for identification purposes. If the person is wearing a hat, hoodie, cap, scarf, it changes the appearance.

    A clear photo is needed for the records; and also, just in case the perp commits another crime…such as jail escape or other after being set free.

    The mozlum perp gets arrested and refuses to comply so she can lie and file a lawsuit….in order to 1) collect money and 2) to cause fear in the LE for the next time they arrest a mozlum female perp.
    word gets around, esp with a federal lawsuit, so any LE which hears about the suit will acquiesce to the demand to keep the head hidden.
    Hide the hair, the ears, the neck and part of the face and one female may look very different with another scarf or no scarf.
    c.a.i.r. is most likely providing the attorneys for this lawsuit.

    How was she harmed to the tune of hundreds of thousands? How will this get rid of her “humiliation”?
    She’s “degraded” by the fact she’s a “devout mozlum.”

    • And, it is possible to hide a weapon under the scarf. For the safety of the officers and any other prisoners, visitors to the station, etc., she and others like her, should be made to comply with this simple order.

    • somehistory -Of course it’s on purpose, nobody can identify her when she commits a crime! She knows exactly what she’s doing. Americans are not allowed to wear any head coverings. What makes her “special?”

  7. The story says she is “white and Black.” And red all over?

    And why is “white” lower-case, while “Black” is upper?

  8. Just one more example of Islamic supremacy rot using freedoms and legal options existent in the West that the Islamic sphere of mankind would have never created in the first place and with the ultimate intent to eventually destroy what the West has created. Proving this all the more is that non-Muslims in Muslim countries have, by comparison, diddly-shit options to put forward their perspectives and complaints contra what exists for Muslims in non-Muslim countries.

    Islam, thy name is hypocrite. Ditto for all those who follow Mo’s warped and parasitical creed. To all Muslims (including the so-called moderate Muslims who give cover to Islam’s many malevolencies), you disgust me. You are all steeped in not only hypocrisy but parasitism as well. Whatever is wrong with the West because of Leftism, it’s nothing you can fix while retaining the best of the West. Eff off. All of you.

    • Is there a list somewhere of all of the mozlums who have broken traffic laws or the requirements for having a license, had years of freedom from arrest, and then, upon arrest, refused to remove the ugly slavewear; made claims of discrimination and filed suit?

      There is an ugly, evil scheme afoot; we know what it is, and by now, so should the authorities know. The authorities should also be willing and ready to counter these actions.

  9. Isn’t degradation and humiliation a part of being arrested? And why should we care about how a criminal feels about the booking process?

    Don’t wanna take off the hijab? You have 2 options…

    1. Don’t commit crimes
    2. GO BACK TO THE MUSLIM COUNTRY YOU CAME FROM!

    • The last name makes me question where she was born…her husband’s religion and a lot more;.
      and like Hugh, I wondered about the black and White issue.

      Why is her race mentioned?

      • sophia johnston doesn’t sound like any kind of moslem name to me.
        The other question is, what was she doing out and about without a male guardian?
        Devout moslem, my ***.

  10. A curious thing about the hijab is that it is worn in honor of a misogynistic god who does not even understand Biology{the scientific mistakes in the koran are well known}It has nothing to do with modesty in fact but is a classifier of women{Tafsir Ibn Kathir}

    {In koran 5:116 allah accidently reveals that he is not omniscient.But never mind that}

    Wear your hijabs muslima sweethearts but stop this hissy fit nonsense please.

    You know what they call an ex-muslima without a hijab?A Smart woman

    • The Bible says that a woman’s hair is her “glory.”

      mozlums don’t want women to have anything good said about them….they are considered lower than a camel. So their “glory” must be covered.

      The mozlum woman can be “covered,” or she can be raped. Of course, she can be both if she is the wife of a mozlum male.
      Forcing women to cover is slavery.

      • “Forcing women to cover is slavery.”

        Slaves to what they believe is a guy in the sky.

        Slaves are–typically–not superior to others (Qur’an 33:59) and they do not–typically–have slaves of their own (Qur’an 24:31).

        And it wasn’t too long ago that Catholic women were required to cover in church.

        • So. Catholics make their own choices.
          The women weren’t killed if they didn’t wear a scarf….and they didn’t have to wear clothing that covered every inch of their person or be raped on the street.
          ;
          and besides that fact, I’m not Catholic and allow Catholics to believe what they wish….they aren’t tying to get me killed for not joining their church. Not Catholic, never have been, never will be.

          When it comes to slavery, those living today who claim their ancestors were slaves, seem to see themselves as superior to the rest of us.

          And just because mozlums see themselves as superior, doesn’t mean that we have to agree….which, I personally, don’t.

          You are free to. however.
          .

        • So. Catholics make their own choices.
          Made: past tense.

          The women weren’t killed if they didn’t wear a scarf
          But they were required to cover.

          and they didn’t have to wear clothing that covered every inch of their person or be raped on the street
          Most wear only hijab. Some don’t comply at all–here, at least.

          and besides that fact, I’m not Catholic and allow Catholics to believe what they wish
          So big of you.

          Not Catholic, never have been, never will be.
          Never suggested you are or were. And you obviously have some animosity toward Catholicism.

          When it comes to slavery, those living today who claim their ancestors were slaves, seem to see themselves as superior to the rest of us.
          That you’re a racist doesn’t surprise me.

          And just because mozlums see themselves as superior, doesn’t mean that we have to agree
          That they belief they’re superior to you doesn’t comport with your belief that they’re slaves.
          .

        • poor you. You lack basic understanding. And see yourself as knowing all.
          You remind me of mort….and seem to be trying to take up where he left off.

          The true “racist” calls others racist, it’s so ingrained, you can’t help it.
          poor you. poor, poor you

        • Poor racist you.

          Your many personal attacks on the physical appearance of others makes it so obvious.

        • Not being respectful of the laws and dress code of the host nations is racist
          Diversity is racist
          Multi culturalism is racist
          We Welcome Refugees is racist

        • The only thing “obvious” is your desire to shut me up.

          Too bad for you.

          I’d rather be me any day than to be even a tiny bit like you.

          Ugly inside and out is True…of anyone evil….and not in the least “racist.” ;
          But that is “basic” and you just don’t get it. You are incapable.

          The one calling racist, is the racist.

        • The one expressing racism is the racist.
          When caught out, the racists standard defence is to blame those who caught them out.

          You’ve made your bed.

        • PRCS,
          As someone who went to Catholic school from K-12, the requirement to ‘cover’ was only in church. The hair wasn’t hidden. Girls wore beanies when we attended Mass on a school day. Most women’s hats didn’t hide their hair. Some had veils which covered only the top of the head. Before the requirement was eliminated, women also had to wear dresses to church. Women wearing shorts or slacks were considered ‘improperly dressed’. That was true even in the public schools.
          One of my sisters had to wear skirts or dresses to the public high school in the 1960’s. Just about all the dress codes for men and women changed in the early 70’s.

        • You call racist just like the rest of those who don’t care whether you tell the Truth or not. Your lies are convenient, so you keep repeating them.

          Your opinion of me is unimportant. My “bed” is comfortable.

          “The ****foolish***** one has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.””

          That shoe is yours…and it’s a perfect fit.

        • Al Sharpton is–without question–a racist.

          Calling him a racist–or anyone else who engages in racist innuendo–does not make racists of those who point it out.

          Your agument is beyond idiotic.

        • Thank you, PMK.

          I know. I grew up in a Catholic house during the 50s and 60s.

          Enjoy your day.

  11. “America, however, is not under Sharia.”

    Per U.S. law, at what point does “religious accommodation” become unreasonable? Without question, the amputation of a human being’s hand and foot on opposite sides (Qur’an 5:33) does.

    But what about religiously mandated clothing?

    The Islamic “veil’s” primary purpose (Qu’ran 33:59) was concocted a long, long time ago, in a place far, far away to protect “free, chaste Muslim women” from public assault by Muslim men by distinguishing them from the slaves and prostitutes of that time and place.

    That purpose is, of course, an insult to every kafir American woman and a slap across their collective faces.

    As to Islam’s so-called modesty: the list of whom uncovered Muslim women can be in the presence of includes her slaves and eunuchs.

    With that in mind, why ever should U.S. police departments force anyone–woman officers in particular–to accommodate, to respect, to comply with and to provide “special privileges per the Sharia” that mainstream Muslims believe reigns supreme over man-made, secular laws?

    Will those issues be addressed by whomever defends against that lawsuit?

    • Your entire reply is anti -American ! America is a successful country built on laws that apply to EVERYONE regardless of religious affiliations. Ms. Johnston showed her total lack of respect for our laws when she decided to drive on a suspended license following with more disrespect by disregarding the citation. She made no attempt to legally remove the offense from her record so she for all intents purposes became a fugitive and is bound by state and federal procedures & laws. No rights were violated during her booking because she gave up those rights by her continued lack of concern in adhering to the laws that apply to everyone regardless of religion, race , sexual orientation etc … if a person or people refuse to do so then they should leave America or be prepared to face the consequences. America is NOT required to change the law to accommodate foreign or religious laws. People need to acclimate and accept American laws or leave. It’s that simple.

      • With her driving record…breaking the law and not getting the issue resolved, non-compliance would naturally lead to “force.”
        A warrant is meant to “force” someone to comply with the Law.
        You are right, of course, in that lawbreaking leads to loss of many freedoms….not “rights,” but certainly freedom to do as one wishes.

      • My reply was VERY pro-American, Penny.

        1. The core question: at what point does religious accomodation become unreasonable? I think the “call to prayer” over a loudspeaker in our country is not reasonable. Others disagree.
        2. Given that the Islamic veil’s primary purpose is to flaunt Islamic supremacism, why is wearing it in this country not an unreasonable accommodation?

        Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

  12. According to the feature article:

    “…she has eight children”…

    Oh, boy…???

  13. “forcing an observant muslima to remove her hijab in front of men..”

    Forcing by…. gunpoint,wet towel treatment?No most likely by a reasonable request.

    Wait a minute!Did she just misgender any of the police officers by ASSUMING they were all men?
    What if one of them was a gay woman?
    Why that could be considered homophobia/transphobia…just find the lawyer who can turn a manufactured grievance and you could make some money.

  16. I wonder how this will play out in Nashville. Will they stand by the laws or run cover for the criminal? I’m a Tennessean still demanding and waiting on the trans killer’s manifesto that’s being held up by the Obiden agenda.

    • Jesse Waters has an interesting report on biden and pelosi; the later saying Republicans need to get with the “values” she espouses…
      Waters also covers the support for lawbreakers in CA.

      There is to be a new law there which says shop owners and staff cannot prevent theft in their stores. The only people who will be allowed to try to prevent theft are security guards. Many small businesses cannot, and do not, employ security. they cannot afford to do that.

      with biden’s doj, this creep may just get the money from TN taxpayers.

  17. She’s learning how to be an American … filing a frivolous lawsuit, for a stupid amount of money.

  18. ‘After an intake officer warned Johnston she’d stay in jail until she took the photo without her hijab, she saw no other choice but to comply, as she has eight children and “could not afford to be incarcerated indefinitely,” the complaint says….’
    ______________
    A pity she didn’t think of that, BEFORE she elected to produce so many offspring!

Discover more from

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Skip to content