The French Council of State, the highest arbiter of administrative disputes, ruled on Tuesday over the ban on wearing hijab swimwear in public pools in Grenoble, arguing it raised hygiene and safety concerns while potentially compromising the impartiality of public services. The decision marks a important step in how public facilities balance health rules with religious expression in a secular republic, especially in a region known for lively municipal debate about dress and inclusivity.
The ruling followed an appeal filed by Grenoble City Council, which had invoked this case to overturn an administrative court decision from May. The city’s move reflected a broader pattern of local authorities testing limits on dress codes in public spaces, and the court’s intervention underscores the tension between evolving local governance and centralized judicial oversight in France.
The judges noted that Article 1 of the Constitution forbids religious beliefs from overriding established common rules, framing the matter as one of ensuring equal treatment and public safety. Their reasoning emphasized that security and hygiene standards must apply consistently, and that allowing religious attire to bypass these rules could threaten the neutral character of public services. The decision thus anchors itself in the principle that neutrality in public facilities is essential to fair administration.
Amid controversy surrounding the burkini, the Council of State took a different stance than in 2016, when it annulled several municipal orders banning the Islamic dress on beaches, arguing that freedoms could not be restricted merely because something was prohibited. The court asserted that limitations require clear evidence of risk, and that mere prohibition does not automatically justify curtailing fundamental liberties in public life.
In May, Grenoble City Council, led by ecologist mayor Éric Piolle, authorized hijab swimwear in municipal pools, extending coverage from ankle to head. The measure aimed to reflect the diverse attire worn by residents while maintaining safety protocols, but it faced immediate scrutiny from higher authorities who questioned how such norms align with municipal rules and regional governance.
Before a complaint from the prefect of Isère, who acts as the departmental representative of the government, the Grenoble Administrative Court suspended the measure, halting its effect pending further judicial examination. The pause allowed time for detailed assessment of whether the policy complied with national standards on hygiene, safety, and secularism in public life.
The Council of State ultimately endorsed a cautious approach, a stance welcomed by Interior Minister Gérard Darmanin, who publicly framed the ruling as a defense of secular principles and the rule of law across the Republic. Darmanin’s comment highlighted a political dimension to the decision, framing it as a sign that public institutions must remain neutral and that independence from sectarian influence is fundamental to state governance.
The minister’s remarks—made through official channels and echoed in social media—emphasized that Grenoble’s mayor was criticized for actions seen as promoting a divisive form of local governance, a move some commentators described as a test of republican unity. The broader conversation addressed how cities can reconcile faith, personal choice, and shared civic norms within a liberal democracy and a secular constitutional framework, with the public awaiting how the next steps will unfold across councils and courts.