A Sikh truck driver from Yuba City was cited for carrying a concealed weapon while on a produce delivery haul in Oregon. His kirpan is a ceremonial dagger common to Sikhism (via Ennis).
The officer allegedly dragged Gill to the ground, shoved a knee into his back and shoved his head into the ground as he handcuffed him, he said. The officer then told him that the police look to pull over people who look as though they are from India, Pakistan and or of the Sikh faith, which Gill and Sraon said is racial profiling and illegal… Gill was cited for carrying a concealed weapon and told to appear in Douglas County Court… Sraon said the kirpan is not a weapon but a religious symbol and therefore protected by law under the first amendment of the Constitution.
Kirpan case law is an example of a very interesting body of law dealing with the conflict of religious beliefs and the public interest (e.g. peyote in Native American rituals, sharia vs. common law, religions which ban modern medical treatment). Since Sikhs are in the minority in most places, they’re often afterthoughts when laws affecting them are enacted. For example, the new hijab ban in France, ostensibly aimed at undermining militant Islam, also inadvertently bans turbans. Nobody thought to ask the small French Sikh community for input, it was a boundary case. And in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, wearing a kirpan provided an easy pretext for cops to detain Sikhs without suspicion of wrongdoing. Continue reading →