Muslim woman, 27, files federal lawsuit against city, police department and police chief after being forced to remove her hijab when booked for having an expired driver's license, describing the experience as 'deeply humiliating'

• e-mail

A Muslim woman has filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Dearborn Heights, Michigan, its police department and police chief, after being forced to remove her hijab following her arrest.

Malak Kazan, 27, claims that officers at Dearborn Heights Police Department violated her First Amendment right to religious freedom by making her remove her head scarf when booking her.

A further part of the law suit covers the fact that there were no female police officers present at the time of her booking, adding to her humiliation.

Malak Kazan, 27, claims that officers at Dearborn Heights Police Department violated her First Amendment right to religious freedom by making her remove her head scarf when booking her for traffic violation

She expressed concern but was told there were no female police officers available. A supervisor then told her that if she did not remove her hijab she could be detained further. 

Her Islamic faith requires her to cover her hair and neck in the presence of men who are not part of her immediate family.

'Your religious freedoms are not stripped at the jailhouse door. It's part of the cannons of their faith to wear a head scarf. For her to have it removed in front of a non-relative male, would be a non-pleasant experience for her,' said Kazan's attorney, Amir Makled.

Kazan's attorney, Amir Makled (pictured left), told Fox 2: 'Your religious freedoms are not stripped at the jailhouse door'. Kazan (pictured right) in a previous booking shot for Dearborn Heights PD

The lawsuit described her experience as a 'deeply humiliating, violating, and defiling experience'.

Kazan was arrested for a warrant following a traffic stop in July 2014 and was arrested having let her driver's license expire. There were two warrants for her arrest because she never appeared in court.

She was booked and detained in November 2014.

Dearborn Heights PD stands by its procedures. 'Articles such as hats, caps, hijabs, can contain concealable items that could pose a threat or chance of injury to the cops or to themselves,' said Dearborn Heights Police Chief Lee Garvin.

'Our procedure is to have them take the hijab off in the presence of a female,' Garvin added. 'We don't always have enough female officers present in the station. Our Number one concern is security of our officers and the prisoners.'

'Articles such as hats, caps, hijabs, can contain concealable items that could pose a threat or chance of injury to the cops or to themselves,' said Dearborn Heights Police Chief Lee Garvin

Makled counters that there was no such threat from Kazan's hijab and sees the policy as discriminatory.

'At this point she is only doing a booking photograph. They can't get in here and say officer safety. It's a booking photo it's used for identity purposes only.'

Professor Larry Dubin from the University of Detroit Law School thinks Kazan has a good religious discrimination law suit

Kazan filed the federal lawsuit to get the department to modify its current policy and allow Muslim women to wear a head scarf during booking procedures to avoid her humiliation.

The word hijab comes from the Arabic word 'hajaba', which means to conceal or hide from view.

Makled is also seeking compensatory and punitive damages for Kazan.

The lawsuit also claims Kazan's Fourth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights were also violated – the right to be secure from unreasonable searches by the government, and the right to equal protection of the laws.

Professor Larry Dubin from the University of Detroit Law School told myFoxDetroit.com that he thinks Kazan has a good religious discrimination lawsuit.

'The First Amendment guarantees religious freedom,' Dubin said. 'She is entitled to wear the hijab and not have it taken off unless there is a more state compelling interest that needs to be satisfied.

'And that's what a federal judge is going to have to decide.'