You can try to wear a spaghetti strainer in a driver’s license photo, but whether the clerk lets you keep it on depends on your state, and in most places the answer is no. Every state bans hats and head coverings in license photos by default, and the only routes around that ban are a sincerely held religious belief or a documented medical need. Pastafarians have occasionally walked out with a colander on their ID, but a federal court has ruled that the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a religion, which gives motor vehicle agencies solid ground to refuse.
The Default Rule and Its Narrow Exceptions
Under the REAL ID Act, a compliant license requires a full facial digital photograph taken to international biometric standards.1eCFR. 6 CFR 37.17 – Requirements for the Surface of the Driver’s License TSA guidance says head coverings worn for religious or other reasons are allowed, but only if they don’t obscure any facial features or cast a shadow. Your face has to be visible from the hairline to the chin and forward of the ears.2TSA.gov. REAL ID Frequently Asked Questions
A colander is not automatically disqualified by the physical rules. Most sit on top of the head and leave the face exposed. The real obstacle is the second gate: qualifying for the religious exception in the first place.
To qualify, you generally need to show two things. First, that the head covering is worn as part of a sincerely held religious belief. Second, that it leaves your full face visible with no shadows. Some states want a signed affidavit or sworn statement. Others ask for a letter from a religious leader. A handful accept a verbal declaration at the counter. That paperwork step is where a colander request usually gets flagged.
Why Pastafarianism Usually Fails
The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster started in 2005 as a satirical protest against teaching intelligent design in public schools. Its adherents wear colanders as a symbolic nod to their “deity.” The legal question is whether that qualifies for the same accommodation given to Muslims, Sikhs, Orthodox Jews, and others whose faith involves head coverings.
The leading ruling is Cavanaugh v. Bartelt, decided in 2016 by a federal district court in Nebraska. The court held that the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a religion but “a satirical rejoinder to a certain strain of religious argument.” Applying a three-part framework, the judge found that a religion addresses fundamental existential questions, consists of a comprehensive belief system, and typically shows formal or external signs of religious practice. Pastafarianism, the court said, met none of the three. The court also held that officials can legitimately question whether a claimed religiosity is authentic when it’s the basis for an accommodation.
Cavanaugh is a single district court decision and doesn’t bind courts nationwide. It is, however, the most thorough judicial analysis on the question, and no federal appellate court has recognized Pastafarianism as a religion. No published decision has gone the other way. For an agency looking for legal cover to say no, that’s enough.
Even where Cavanaugh doesn’t control, the sincerely held belief standard creates its own problem. Courts don’t evaluate whether a belief is “correct,” only whether it’s genuine and occupies a place in the person’s life comparable to an orthodox religious belief. The movement was founded as satire, and many adherents describe it that way openly. Tell a clerk you’re wearing the strainer as a joke or a political statement, and the agency has clear grounds to refuse. Political protest is not religious practice for headwear purposes.
Some states pile on an additional filter. Ohio’s Bureau of Motor Vehicles requires that religious head coverings be “usually and customarily worn whenever the person appears in public,” such as at work, school, or job interviews. Since Pastafarians don’t typically wear colanders in daily life, Ohio has concluded the exception doesn’t apply. That “customarily worn” standard is a high bar, and most colander applicants can’t clear it.
What Has Actually Happened When People Tried
Results vary wildly by state, by office, and by the individual clerk. Massachusetts allowed a woman to wear a colander in her license photo in 2015. Arizona has treated it as an approved head covering, and at least one resident there obtained a colander license photo. In Texas, Eddie Castillo was photographed wearing a pasta strainer in 2013 after a dispute with the Department of Public Safety, though the agency later said it would review and “rectify” the situation. Ohio flatly denied the request under its “customarily worn” policy.
A pattern runs through those outcomes. The approvals tend to come from individual clerks or local offices making on-the-spot calls. The denials come from agencies that had time to route the request through a legal department. If the clerk shrugs and takes the photo, you might walk out with a strainer on your license. If the request gets kicked upstairs, you almost certainly won’t. And as the Texas case shows, a photo that gets taken can still be flagged and undone later.
What to Expect If You Try
Walk in wearing a colander and request a religious accommodation, and you should expect some mix of questions about your beliefs, a request for documentation, a delay while a supervisor is consulted, or a straight denial. A few practical points are worth keeping in mind before you go.
- The strainer still has to meet photo standards. It cannot block any part of your face or throw shadows. A deep stockpot-style colander sitting low on the forehead gets rejected on photo-quality grounds alone, regardless of the religious question.
- A denial is unlikely to be a viable constitutional claim. With Cavanaugh on the books and no appellate decision recognizing Pastafarianism as a religion, suing over a refusal would be expensive and a long shot.
- An approval isn’t permanent. Even a successfully taken photo can be flagged by the agency’s legal department after the fact, as happened in Texas.
- State policies differ significantly. Some agencies evaluate headwear claims liberally; others apply strict tests like the “customarily worn in public” standard. Check your state motor vehicle agency’s website or call ahead before making the trip.
Nothing in federal law specifically forbids a colander in a license photo, and nothing protects your right to wear one either. The outcome turns on whether your state treats Pastafarianism as a qualifying religious belief, and most agencies that have looked at the question closely have decided it doesn’t.