 |
| Photo: Shutterstock |
The law, which was originally created in 1951, was designed to prevent members of the Ku Klux Klan from wearing their hoods and hiding their identities while marching or rallying on public land, in order to keep them from getting away with violence due to anonymity.
The original text reads, “when he wears a mask,” while the new language would change that to “he or she.” Spencer maintains that he wanted to protect the public against masked terrorists of any sex, but has removed the bill from consideration following the outcry.
“While this bill does not contain language that specifically targets any group, I am mindful of the perception that it has created,” Spencer said in a statement. “My objective was to address radical elements that could pose a threat to public safety.”
In 1990, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that the law could only be applied to people wearing masks for the purpose of intimidation or threat, and by this clarification it couldn’t be used against Muslim women because they don’t wear burkas or other coverings to intimidate. However, considering the current anti-Muslim cast to American politics, it seems likely that people might attempt to argue that is exactly what they’re doing.
The changes that Spencer introduced don’t seem to make much of a difference to the law, and it’s really only the semantics of language that prevents it from being applied to Muslim women in the first place, but all of this does bring to light a serious flaw in the original 1951 law. If the point of that law, as clarified in 1990, is simply to try and rein in activities by the Ku Klux Klan, why doesn’t it say that? Why doesn’t Georgia simply outlaw a group that, by its own admittance, is a terrorist organization?
إرسال تعليق