The Supreme Court of the United States, in a gesture that can only be described as a ritualistic scalping of constitutional principle, has ruled that prison guards may forcibly shave the dreadlocks of incarcerated Rastafarians. Justice Clarence Thomas, penning the majority opinion, wrote with the spectral air of a man who has long since abandoned his own shadow. The case, an amalgamation of institutional thuggery and theological illiteracy, concerns a prisoner whose faith demanded he keep his locks unshorn.
The Court, however, decided that a 'compelling interest' in uniform hair length outweighed the free exercise thereof. I have seen more nuanced debates over the correct method of decapitating a chicken. Justice Sotomayor, in a dissent that could strip paint from a battleship, argued that the decision 'gives prison officials a carte blanche to trim away the First Amendment with impunity.
' She is, of course, correct. The ruling effectively declares that the Constitution is a buffet from which the state may pick and choose which rights to respect, leaving a trail of religion-friendly crumbs for the gilded birds of the establishment. For the world beyond America, this is a shrill clarion call.
The global trend towards authoritarian piety is now buttressed by a legal precedent that allows the state to literally and figuratively shave off religious identity in the name of order. It is a decision that would make Torquemada blush. One can only imagine the whispered conversations in the prison corridors now: 'Your God may wear a crown of thorns, but in my gaol, he wears a bald pate.
' The rationale, as flimsy as a politician's promise, rests on a prison's argument that dreadlocks could hide contraband. This is the same logic that would ban trousers for the possible concealment of a howitzer. The absurdity is breath-taking.
But we live in an age where absurdity has become a legal currency. The Supreme Court has minted a new coin, and it is stamped with the image of a newly shorn Rastafarian, his locks now resting in a bin bag under the watchful eye of a guard who probably voted for the man who appointed these justices. The implications are global.
From the turbaned Sikh in a French school to the bearded Muslim in a German airport, the message is clear: your faith is a luxury that the state may revoke at its convenience. The League of Nations, were it still alive, would have issued a strongly worded telegram. Today, we have this court, this ruling, and this creeping theocratic totalitarianism.
I propose a new tradition: every time a Rastafarian is shorn, let every journalist in the free world shave their head in solidarity. The resulting gleaming dome of protest would be a sight to behold. But then, the court's ruling would also apply to journalists, so perhaps not.
We must be careful with our outrage. It is the only currency left that hasn't been debased by the judiciary.
