Sikh’s Religious Rights Violated by Town Court Judge in New York (Video)

A Sikh named Harjit Singh was asked to take his turban off while in a court in Albany, NY. The judge repeatedly asked him to take off his “hat.” The religious rights of the Sikh was violated as the turban is an important part of the Sikh faith.

The court judge actually violated the first amendment which prohibits the government from restricting religious rights of a person.

People expressed outrage with the following comments on social network:

“I humbly request people commenting in favor of the Judge to research what Sikh religion is. All Sikh men are required to wear Turban(article of faith) as part of their identity not a fashion statement and definitely not a hat. Turban reminds Sikh to uphold the core beliefs of the Sikh faith (Believe in one God, Equality for all, earn an honest living and share with needy). Being a member of Judiciary, we would expect Judge to be more sensitive to someone’s beliefs. Sikhs are an integral part of this community and have every right to practice their religion freely. USA is a melting pot of all different cultures and religions we should never forget that.” Amrit Singh

“The United States First Amendment prohibits governments from restricting an individual’s religious practice. If a Jew was present in court, he would not have been told to take off his yarmulke as it is a sacred part of the Jewish religion and is seen as a way of respecting God. What is the difference between a yarmulke and a turban, other than the religions they represent? Anyone commenting, “our country, our rules” should take time and read the Constitution. America was built on land taken from the Native Americans so it is not “our country, our rules.” This man experienced a violation of a freedom that all Americans have, which is a freedom of religion and the freedom to wear his turban, which is a sacred sign of his Sikh religion. Not only was it disrespectful for the judge to request him to take off his turban, but it was also against the Constitution. It may be “the judge’s courtroom” but that courtroom exists under the United States Constitution.” Andrew Inderjit

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.