Burkini ban overturned by French court

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/26/europe/france-burkini-ban-court-ruling/

Congratulations to the French court system for, at least this once, protecting the rights of its citizens.

Originally posted by sh76
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/26/europe/france-burkini-ban-court-ruling/

Congratulations to the French court system for, at least this once, protecting the rights of its citizens.

ummm I find it not a little intimidating to counsel a lawyer on facets of law but the ban has not been overturned, its merely been put on hold until the courts decide the legality of it.

The ruling from the state council suspends a single decree against full-body swimsuits issued by the mayor in the southern resort of Villeneuve-Loubet, near Nice. But it is likely to set a precedent for other towns that have banned the swimwear on their beaches.

The state council ruled that the mayor did not have the right to issue a burkini ban – stating that local authorities could only restrict individual liberties if there was a “proven risk” to public order. It believed that proven risk had not been demonstrated.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/26/frances-highest-court-suspends-burkini-ban-in-test-case

That will be 1200 pounds Sterling, legal fees please! 😛

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
ummm I find it not a little intimidating to counsel a lawyer on facets of law but the ban has not been overturned, its merely been put on hold until the courts decide the legality of it.

The ruling from the state council suspends a single decree against full-body swimsuits issued by the mayor in the southern resort of Villeneuve-Loubet, near Nice. ...[text shortened]... rt-suspends-burkini-ban-in-test-case

That will be 1200 pounds Sterling, legal fees please! 😛

From the article you cited:

"The state council ruled that the mayor did not have the right to issue a burkini ban – stating that local authorities could only restrict individual liberties if there was a “proven risk” to public order. It believed that proven risk had not been demonstrated."

While the ruling could be reversed, the court clearly demonstrated that it believed that the ban was a violation of individual rights.

Originally posted by sh76
From the article you cited:

"The state council ruled that the mayor did not have the right to issue a burkini ban – stating that local authorities could only restrict individual liberties if there was a “proven risk” to public order. It believed that proven risk had not been demonstrated."

While the ruling could be reversed, the court clearly demonstrated that it believed that the ban was a violation of individual rights.

I don't think its been proven or disproven whether the ban is actually a violation of an individuals rights. It appears to hinge on a proven risk to public order and this is why the French courts have temporarily suspended the ban to test the case. Its difficult to see how wearing religious garb may be construed as effecting a risk to public order but in view of the recent events in France any association with Islam and its ideology may reasonably be subjected to scrutiny. Its interesting and early days yet, lets see what transpires. 😀

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I don't think its been proven or disproven whether the ban is actually a violation of an individuals rights. It appears to hinge on a proven risk to public order and this is why the French courts have temporarily suspended the ban to test the case. Its difficult to see how wearing religious garb may be construed as effecting a risk to public order b ...[text shortened]... ably be subjected to scrutiny. Its interesting and early days yet, lets see what transpires. 😀

=== Its difficult to see how wearing religious garb may be construed as effecting a risk to public order ===

This, in your words, is the compelling case for the overturn of the ban.

Originally posted by sh76
=== Its difficult to see how wearing religious garb may be construed as effecting a risk to public order ===

This, in your words, is the compelling case for the overturn of the ban.

Easy there. . . . but in view of the recent events in France any association with Islam and its ideology may reasonably be subjected to scrutiny 😀

Originally posted by sh76
From the article you cited:

"The state council ruled that the mayor did not have the right to issue a burkini ban – stating that local authorities could only restrict individual liberties if there was a “proven risk” to public order. It believed that proven risk had not been demonstrated."

While the ruling could be reversed, the court clearly demonstrated that it believed that the ban was a violation of individual rights.

It's a proven risk to fashion and taste.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

It is not what France can do for its minorities ,it is what the minorities can do for France .( Phil300 26 August 2016)

The post that was quoted here has been removed

So .it's you giving me the thumbs down .( shock ,horror ).

Originally posted by sh76
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/26/europe/france-burkini-ban-court-ruling/

Congratulations to the French court system for, at least this once, protecting the rights of its citizens.

It doesn't seem to be much to celebrate about; the Court seems to have ruled based on Federalism issues. Based on what the French political leaders are saying, you can expect a national ban to be enacted shortly.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

The European Court of Human Rights upheld the French burqa and niqab ban in 2014.http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/01/world/europe/france-burqa-ban/

I see little reason to believe that they wouldn't uphold a national ban on burkinas based on that precedent. Euro courts don't take Natural Rights very seriously relying on the more squishy concept of "human rights",

A victory for skimpy bikini gazers.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I don't think its been proven or disproven whether the ban is actually a violation of an individuals rights. It appears to hinge on a proven risk to public order and this is why the French courts have temporarily suspended the ban to test the case. Its difficult to see how wearing religious garb may be construed as effecting a risk to public order b ...[text shortened]... ably be subjected to scrutiny. Its interesting and early days yet, lets see what transpires. 😀

RC: any association with Islam and its ideology may reasonably be subjected to scrutiny.

I don't suppose you see anything wrong with this statement which, in effect, endorses a Holy War against a segment of a nation's citizens merely because of the violent acts of a few. I'd call it "profiling" and/or "collective punishment" both of which are deeply offensive to any idea of freedom and limited government.