News & Editorial

The Trial

The Law

Misinformation

Message Boards

Islam & The Niqab

Email

A Partial List of States that Allow No Photo for Religious Reasons

Numerous states throughout the United States provide religious exceptions from a photo requirement on a driver's license. These states have accomodated an individual's First Amendment rights and have not found that the state's interest is so compelling as to require an individual to choose between violating a fundamental religious tenet or surrendering their driver's license.

In addition, these driver's pass through the state of Florida and encounter law enforcement with no significant problem, hence no compelling state interest.

These states include but are not limited to:

1. In Arkansas, a driver's license may be valid without a photograph of the license when the commision is advised that the requirement of the photograph is either objectionable on the grounds of religious belief or the license is unavailble to have a photograph taken. See Arkansas Statute Section 27-16-801(b)(2).
2. In Iowa, issuance of a driver's license may not be denied a person solely on the ground that s/he refuses to have a photograph taken, when that refusal is based upon his/her religious beliefs. See Op. Atty. Gen. (Preisser) October 26, 1976.
3. In Kansas, a driver's license which does not contain a color photograph of the licensee as required may be issued to persons exempted from such requirement. Any such person belonging to a religious organization which has a basic objection to having their photograph taken may sign a statement to that effect and such person shall then be exempt from the picture requirements of this section. See Kansas Statute Section 8-243(a).
4. In Louisiana, applicants will not be photographed with head coverings such as hats, scarves or other adornments. The only exception to this will be any religious sect requiring head covering or any other attire. See Lousiana Dept. of Public Safety, Office of Motor Vehicles, Section I, Issuance of Driver's Licenses, No. 14.00.
5. In Minnesota, the Commissioner of Public Safety may adopt rules to permit identification on a driver's license or Minnesota identification card in lieu of a photograph or electronically produced image, where the Commissioner finds that the licensee has religious objections to the use of a photograph or electronically produced image. See Minnesota Statute, Section 171.071.
6. In Missouri, the Director of Revenue shall issue a license without a photograph to an applicant therefor who is otherwise qualified to be licensed, upon presentation to the Director of a statement on forms prescribed and made available by the Department of Revenue which states that the applicant is a member of a specified religious denomination, which prohibits photographs as being contrary to its religious tenets.
7. North Carolina
8. Oregon
9. South Carolina
10. Wisconsin
11. Idaho
12. In Vermont, photos are not normally issued unless one requests it
13. In Indiana, "IC 9-24-11-5 (d). The bureau may provide for the omission of a photograph or computerized image from any other license or permit if there is good cause for the omission."
14. In California, members of the Molikan sect can receive non-photo driver's license (1998). 

In Canada, our friendly neighbor of the north, one can apply to become a Canadian citizen without showing a photograph if it violates a tent of his/her religion. One can also apply for a passport with no photo as a Canadian citizen for the same reason.

Even in the United States, exceptions have been made on a case by case by basis for American citizens who wish to travel abroad but are opposed to a photo for religious reasons (see California Molikan religion granted photo exception to the passport by the Federal State Department in 1998).

Although the state of Florida is in no way compelled to adopt laws of other states, that is not the point in raising the issue. The point is that there are already driver's with valid non-photo licenses driving in Florida, pulled over by law enfocement, issued tickets, etc., and these people present no problem or threat to the Florida system. It goes to the arguement of compelling state interest, showing that the system is already equipped to deal with exeptions.

Finally, one should note that the law does not allow one to say that a religious belief of veiling the face but exposing the eyes, is any less valid than another person's belief against pictures of any portion of the face, because the commonality is that they are both sincerely held religious beliefs.

Whenever challenged, photo exceptions have always been made for Christians and Jews and should equally be granted to Muslims who believe that only the eyes can be photographed.

---