On Tuesday, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) issued a ruling that allows employers to ban staff from wearing a hijab or any other religious symbol. The court gave judgment about the cases of two women who were fired from their place of employment for refusing to remove their hijab. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the employers, stating it does not constitute “direct discrimination” if a firm implements an internal rule banning the wearing of any “political philosophical or religious sign.”

There were two separate cases brought to the ECJ on this issue. One case involved French woman, Asma Bougnaoui, who was fired from an IT consultancy position after a customer complained that her hijab made them uncomfortable. The court did rule in favor of Bougnaoui, clarifying that complaints from customers are not to be considered “a genuine and determining occupational requirement.”

However, next was the case of Belgian woman Samira Achita, who was fired from her receptionist job of three years after deciding to wear a hijab. In this case, the court ruled on the side of the employer and clarified that an employee may be dismissed for displaying a religious symbol “if based on equal application of internal company policy.” This is the ruling that has set a dangerous precedence for discriminatory policies against women who choose to wear a hijab working in Europe.

These stipulations place executive power in the hands of the employer to ban veiled women, which has had dire consequences. Following this ruling, an inquiry by the Women and Equalities Committee found that Muslim women were three times less likely to be employed. The report highlighted the role of “unconscious bias” in discrimination against women that wear the hijab or have Muslim sounding names.

Regardless of Europe’s supposedly historic belief in freedom and tolerance, this ruling has received widespread criticism for being inherently discriminatory and xenophobic. The case made by Belgian columnist Warda el-Kaddouri to Al-Jazeera is poignant and states that “A ban on religious and political symbols feels to me as a disguised ban on the hijab. I cannot think of another symbol that will affect hundreds of thousands of people in Europe.” The ruling has also been attacked for stripping Muslim women from having agency of their body and dress. El-Kaddouri continues, “By stating that veiled women can simply take off their hijab, you imply that the empowerment of women to be in control of their own body and to make individual decisions is reserved for white women only.”

Right wing political parties throughout Europe have supported the ruling, claiming its goal is to promote secularism and preserve a business’s right to appear neutral. In France, where the niqab has been outlawed since 2010, Presidential candidate François Fillon made a public statement calling it an “immense relief.” Germany is looking to follow suit, with a leader from the rightwing populist party Georg Pazderski saying “The ECJ’s ruling sends out the right signal, especially for Germany.” Austria is also mulling a complete ban on the full-faced veil in all public areas.

This is not the first time religious discrimination has permeated policy in Europe and the outcome was devastating. This case provided an opportunity for EU institutions to promote acceptance in a tense political climate, instead, this ruling could signal a dangerous turning point for rising xenophobia in Europe. “The court could and should have seized the opportunity to put a halt to the multiple discriminations faced by Muslim women and protect their fundamental rights, but they chose not to,” Kim Lecoyer, president of Belgium-based Muslim Women Lawyers for Human Rights told Al Jazeera.