Fed Appeals Court Rules Against Okla. Ban on Islamic Law
- Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:14am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
Muneer Awad (left) executive director of CAIR Oklahoma
OKLAHOMA CITY (The Blaze/AP) — A proposed constitutional amendment that would ban Oklahoma courts from considering international or Islamic law discriminates against religions, and a Muslim community leader has the right to challenge its constitutionality, a federal appeals court said Tuesday.
The court in Denver upheld U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange’s order blocking implementation of the amendment shortly after it was approved by 70 percent of Oklahoma voters in November 2010.
Muneer Awad, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma, sued to block the law from taking effect, arguing that the Save Our State Amendment violated his First Amendment rights.
“This is an important reminder that the Constitution is the last line of defense against a rising tide of anti-Muslim bigotry in our society, and we are pleased that the appeals court recognized that fact,” Awad said. “We are also hopeful that this decision serves as a reminder to politicians wishing to score political points through fear-mongering and bigotry.”
The amendment read, in part: “The courts shall not look to the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia law.”
State Sen. Anthony Sykes, who led the Senate effort to get the measure on the ballot, said Tuesday he would continue to fight to lift the injunction.
“The federal appeals court in Denver attempted to silence the voice of 70 percent of Oklahoma voters,” Sykes said in a statement. “At some point we have to decide whether this is a country of by and for the judges, or of by and for the people. How far will the people let them go? This ruling is right along with legalizing abortion and forced busing of school children.”
Backers argued that the amendment intended to ban all religious laws, that Islamic law was merely named as an example and that it wasn’t meant as a specific attack on Muslims. The court disagreed.
“That argument conflicts with the amendment’s plain language, which mentions Sharia law in two places,” the appeals court opinion said.
The court also noted that the backers of the amendment acknowledged they did not know of any instance when an Oklahoma court applied Sharia law or used the legal precepts of other countries.
Awad argued that the ban on Islamic law would likely affect every aspect of his life as well as the execution of his will after his death. The appeals court pointed out that Awad made a “strong showing” of potential harm.
“When the law that voters wish to enact is likely unconstitutional, their interests do not outweigh Mr. Awad’s in having his constitutional rights protected,” the court said.
The case now returns to federal court in Oklahoma City to determine the constitutionality of the proposed amendment.
“My office will continue to defend the state in this matter and proceed with the merits of the case,” Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt said in a statement.
In September, the Blaze also brought you a report about Muslims who support banning Sharia law in America, as this issue continues to be discussed in numerous states around the nation. Currently, 20 other states are weighing laws against Islamic law.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 688 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 537 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 466 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 374 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 334 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 308 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 316 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 216 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 301 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 308 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (462)
cessna152
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:57amBut Christian prayer is not allowed at school, public buildings, cemeteries, etc? These Judges need to put in jail… How much more do we need to see erode away before we start rebuilding our foundation?
Report Post »turkey13
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:19amBeing from Oklahoma this ticks me off – we voted for this law – Democrats and Republicans ans all Americans. The Feds want to show that the statesa will not pass laws that they don’t approve of. While this battle is going on, two Muslim familys in our small town have died during thy night when their houses burned. Then fire marshall deemed as accidents.
Report Post »Detroit paperboy
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:33amThe Criminal Federal Government Has Become The Enemy Of The People……. PERIOD
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:47am“But Christian prayer is not allowed at school, public buildings, cemeteries, etc?”
This is not true. Prayer (of any religion) is allowed in schools and public locations. It cannot be led by state officials or employees nor forced on the rest of the people in the area.
Report Post »4theRepublic
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 10:27am@locked uhm no… here in Oklahoma you are NOT allowed to pray in school nor at athletic events (doesn’t matter who leads it). Why… mostly because they are scared of lawsuits. Any Christian based organizations are not allowed to form on school grounds any more. When I went to school I was a part of The Fellowship of Christian Athletes and we met in school, before and after games as well as at private homes. Now the same FCA org is not allowed anywhere near the schools.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 10:38am@4therepublic
“uhm no… here in Oklahoma you are NOT allowed to pray in school nor at athletic events (doesn’t matter who leads it).”
Please find the legislation on this, because searching online is turning up nothing. Not surprising, as banning prayer carte blanche is not Constitutional. There are obviously rules to follow; the prayers cannot disrupt classes, be led by teachers/staff, forced on others; but prayer is definitely allowed in school.
Report Post »FourthGenFarmer
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 5:00pmwhere is prayer forbidden anywhere…what are you talking about? people are allowed to pray anywhere they want in this country any time they want to. Prayer is talking to god..who can stop that…answer: noone can, and noone is trying to. You bible thumpers think just becuase we as a society we dont want you running calls to prayer over the loudspeakers in town and school (like they do in the middle east) that somehow that is discrimination against you. give me a break. i have been a student though 12 years of primary school and 4 years of university, and i have NEVER seen anyone told that they cannot pray if they want to, ever. I have seen very active prayer groups on campus, and guess what…they pray all the time, all over the campus, and noone tries to stop them, because most of us have better things to do.
and a side note to all of you implying that violence towards muslims is the way to go, you are the lowest of the low and cowards in the extreme. And anyone who tries to ethnicly or religously cleanse this nation better know they are going to go though me (and many others like me) to do it.
Report Post »TulsaYeeHaw
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:02pmUm, LOCKED, I too live here in Oklahoma. Huge numbers of school districts have stopped allowing christian organizations from doing whatever on their grounds out of fear from being sued. There was no legislation, because the people leading that effort know that doing it the way the did hear would give them plausible deniability, so people like you would not believe it was happening.
Report Post »Rayblue
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:50amHonor killings, stoning, beheading, “Burkas R Us” on the corner. The smell of roasting goat. The sweet sound of prayers every day from a tower. Prayer breaks at the existing jobs. Controlled speech. Witch hunts and sorcery trials are just a left handed stones throw away.
Report Post »rush_is_right
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:55amvery true….I wonder where all those ‘it can’t happen here’ types are……
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:07am“The smell of roasting goat. The sweet sound of prayers every day from a tower. Prayer breaks at the existing jobs.”
To be fair, this doesn’t sound so bad. Get the Christian equivalent: what Christian doesn’t love barbecue, the sound of church hymns, or being able to pray at work unmolested?
Report Post »Thatsitivehadenough
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:25amLook at the bright side. Eventually even Nancy Pelosi, Michelle Obama & Joy Behar will have to wear burkas.
Report Post »Veteran Patriot
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:43amI think a muzzle would be the proper accessory in this case.
Report Post »momrules
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:47amSoon, we will have to fight them on our own soil because we cannot fight them and win in the courts.
Report Post »Rayblue
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 10:51amLocked…conveinently left out the Christian practice of beheading, stoning and women as property.
Report Post »And amplified nonsensical yodeling from a tower is not the equivalent of a Church bell on Sunday.
Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 11:04am“what Christian doesn’t love barbecue, the sound of church hymns, or being able to pray at work unmolested?”
Looks like the answer is “Rayblue is such a Christian.”
Report Post »stormcrow53
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 11:23amThe battle is on, mom. The war is here. The attack that left 14 dead at Ft. Hood. The recruiter killed in Arkansas. The World Trade center, twice. Oklahoma City bombing and all the terrorists that have failed: the Christmas underwear bomber, the Reed shoe bomber, the Tampa plotter, the Virginia Jihad Network, the Lackawanna six, the Fort Dix plot. The list boggles the mind. They can say what they will. Taqiyya and Kitman. As the percentage of Muslims rises in any nation so does this war. We can face it or not. Submit or die? Hell no. Fight!
Report Post »macpappy
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 2:32pm@momrules
Report Post »Start fighting now. Stop supporting them, stop shopping in muslim owned stores, stop buying things made in India, Pakistan, etc. It’s not hard to stop, but you will find that they already own every mom and pop operation in town. They laugh at us as we fund the terror from the local 7-11, but our government would have us believe it’s drugs, Thats crap, the mexican cartels would not roll over for rag head terrorist, in lue of profits.
Rayblue
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 6:54pmThe answer“rayblue is such a Christian” is assumptive on your part.
Report Post »You could quit the preschool presumptive projection of who is going to turn the other cheek.
charles4227
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:47amIslam is not a religion it’s a damn cult!! AS for CAIR they can kiss my ass!!! If you come from another country, you live by our laws not your old laws. If you want to live by your other country laws then get the hell out of the U.S. and go back where you came from and take your cult and your laws with you!!! AMERICA LOVE IT OR LIVE IT, but don’t you dare try to change it to a slave of Islam.
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:53amJudaism is not a religion, it’s a cult… using your same reasoning.
Report Post »itsmyfirstday
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:53amAmen
Report Post »JLGunner
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:55amThis is the result of a successful cultural jihad. Our progressives are handing our country over to our enemies on a silver platter. I worry about the paulies writing in Ron on the ballots and giving barack another 4 years to destroy the constitution they suposedly hold so dear to their hearts.
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:47amWho are our real enemies? Who are the most dangerous to our culture and way of life?
I say that George Soros poses far more danger to America, and our way of life, than did the two-bit thug bin Laden. I say that Stern, Sunstein, Bloom, Axelrod, Emanuel, Lew, Feinberg, Klain, Summers, Orszag, Frank, Wasserman-Schultz, Schumer, Sanders, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, Franklin, Bernanke, Kagan, Ginsburg, Breyer, Plouffe, … all following the philosophies of Marx, Alinsky and Piven… are our real enemies and present danger.
All are Jews. These are the powerful people actively changing America and its culture, and they have a huge supporting cast: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/19/opinion/oe-stein19
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 10:07am@The_Jerk
“Who are our real enemies? Who are the most dangerous to our culture and way of life?”
Those who would pit Americans against their fellows, who would divide us. Obama has done so. People who scream that Muslims, all Muslims, are evil and anti-American, they do so. People like you, who spout Antisemitism against a single religion, you do so.
In short, fundamentalists of any stripe, of any creed or religion or philosophy. Those who will not see their fellow citizens as Americans, but others to be shunned, decried, feared, or cast down. YOU are the most dangerous kind of person to our culture and country.
Report Post »stormcrow53
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 12:01pm@ Locked: How about those fellow Americans that were lynching and enslaving black people from the early beginnings of this nation? Should we have tolerated that behavior because they were fellow Americans? That culture was correctly exterminated. It took war to disentangle the tenets of slavery from the laws and the congress. And now we are allowing another murderous, enslaving ideology to subvert the laws of the land for multicultural diversity?
Report Post »Do you think they are sinking into civil war in Nigeria because the Nigerian Christians have armies in Saudi Arabia or Iraq? Or because they support Israel with money and weapons? You are lost. I pity you because you, as a supporter of this multicultural diversity ideology, will be one of the first they kill when they achieve their goals.
Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 12:11pm@Stormcrow
I would say that killing the people of our country counts as “dividing.” Given your example, I can only conclude you disagree? That you find lynchers, murderers, and racists the same as Jews and Muslims speaks volumes about your beliefs. Yes, you are the problem as well, a divider. Go hang out with Obama and trouble us no more.
Report Post »noczars
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 12:19pm@LOCKED = You should be locked up in GITMO
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 12:28pm@Noczars
Oh? Pray tell, for what offense? For not painting all Muslims and Jews as lynchers, murderers, and racists? Sorry if you align yourself with such ideas; they’re not for me.
Report Post »maccow
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 1:16pm@Locked
Report Post »You are a voice of rational sanity in a knee jerk reactionary space. You are well thought out, reasoned and polite, so of course the haters are going to target you. If everyone starts agreeing with you it will mean that you have either succeeded and truth has prevailed, or you have caved. Don’t cave.
I may not agree 100% but I respect the tone.
USAMEDIC3008
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:45amONE more step to ONE WORLD GOV.
Report Post »Tickdog
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:44amwhat a bunch of BS… get rid of these ignorant ass judges!
Report Post »elbasco
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 10:20amWhere will all these activists judges and liberals be when Sheria law kicks in. They are sharpening the guillotine that will be used against them and doing the hang mans rope that will hang them. They try this type oc activism under the law they are now protecting and death will be their sentence.
Report Post »KICKILLEGALSOUT
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:43amThis lawsuit just proves the fact that these Mohammedan barbarians want Sharia law here and will stop at nothing until everything in America is under their total submission. The activist judges we have in this country are already handing this Satanic death cult our freedoms and right to defend ourselves from their evil. I fear our options are running out and it will be up to the American people to take the law into their own hands to fight for what is right and prevent this evil from flourishing and poisoning our communities!
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:52amTake a deep breath and relax. No one is implementing Sharia law, that’s the media soundbite that they want to develop. As I understand it, they are just permitting more information into the courtroom. They are not saying that this information can be used to overrule Constitutional protections already present.
I defer to the more legally astute to clarify this issue, but that is my very limited take.
Report Post »SoupSandwich
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:23amHey Jerk-
Report Post »I hear you, we all need to settle down and step back from time to time. Why do we already have sharia compliant financing here? Most muslims I have known are decent people, not radicalized and have families and jobs like the rest of us. However…when pushed into conversation over the other side-always the same old crap-those others we cannot control. If I had nazi aryans or the kkk in my hood-we would have issues and would chat about them seeking a more friendly environment for their hate. Not seeing it with islam. Cair has an agenda. Where is the line in the sand and how come when I send cases of pork rinds to cair for out reach, I don’t even get a thank you?
mtnclimberjim
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:30amJerk,
Just ask Britain how that’s working out for them. Do you think the ******* will stop there?
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:53amMtnclimberjim, you’re looking in the wrong place. The breach has already occurred in our courts:
Report Post »http://www.globalgovernancewatch.org/spotlight_on_sovereignty/sovereignty-advocates-urge-us-supreme-court-to-not-rely-on-international-law
progressiveslayer
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:43amThe handwriting‘s on the wall and they’ve set precedent with this ruling.The last step would be SCOTUS and that’s if they agree to hear it.CAIR is a front group for hamas so the intentions of cair are suspect to say the least.
Report Post »DVDJR
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:41amThe Supreme Law of the land is the Constitution. That law does not include Sharia law.
Report Post »jay1975
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:15amIt doesn’t include Christian law either, so why single one out?
Report Post »4theRepublic
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 10:48am@jay1975 and what is “Christian Law”? How much of “Christian Law” violates or goes against our Constitutional laws? After you answer these questions, please feel free to answer them again with “Sharia Law”…
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 11:13am@4theRepublic
Actually, Christian laws allows for honor killing, stoning, slavery, captial punishment for practing other religions or breaking any of the laws in Leviticus or Deuteronomy, genocide.
Yeah, Christian law is not much better.
,
Report Post »4theRepublic
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 12:10pm@encinom… hahaha you make me laugh. Get it right!! The old Testament called for certain “extreme” rules, laws and punishments. However, as a Christian (A follower of Jesus) you are to love your neighbor and obey the ten commandments. You are incorrect in your statement…
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 12:50pmSo 4thRepublic, the laws within the Old testiment can be ignored, the prohibition on homosexuality, which means you support Gay marriage, good to know.
Report Post »4theRepublic
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 1:42pmThere you go, putting words in my mouth and making your own conclusions based on what you think I am thinking. Next thing you‘ll say is that I am racist because I don’t support the President. If you must know, I detest homosexuality and will never support it. I hate the sin but not the sinner. Who am I to judge, but I will tell them how I feel and why. I would never dole any punishment out to someone who believes they are homosexual. I know Moses’ laws call for the “offender” to be punished by death, but Moses is NOT God. Moses was a great profit, but he was an angry, impatient man (emphasis on man). I follow the Ten Commandments not the “laws of man” from Exodus, Deuteronomy, or Leviticus. However, I do use them as a basis to my understanding of what they were going thru on their path to God. As far as I can tell, the Constitution follows the ten commandments pretty well (with the exemption of 1,2,&3).
Report Post »maccow
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 1:47pm@Encinom
Actually this is a reply to encinom’s post but is meant for the rest of you as encinom is just a bomb throwing troll.
What he calls “Christian Law” doesn’t exist. The Old Testament laws have multiple purposes. They were the foundation of Jewish civil life in ancient times, and still form a foundation of their religious traditions today.
From the Christian perspective, they form the foundation for our need for redemption. But for the law of a Holy God I would not know my need for a savior. Jesus used the commandments of the law, along with His own commandments to apply the law to our hearts, to convict us of our need to have our hearts changed in order to be made right with God. Jesus lived what that changed heart could look like. Faith in Him is the way to that changed heart.
What we have today are JudeoChristian principles not Christian Law.
“Jesus didn’t come to make bad men good,but rather to make dead men alive.”
Report Post »4theRepublic
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 2:21pm@MACCOW, well said and thank you. Also, I read through your previous posts and am impressed. I will do better to try and communicate as well as you.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 2:23pm@4th Republic, I love the dancing around the issue, while the other Evangelicals claims that this is Christian Law and their justification for their bigotry.
Report Post »Docrow
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:40amOur votes do not count anymore and next the president with by pass congress.
Report Post »TomFerrari
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:58amHe already has – many times.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 11:14amNovote counts when the goal of the vote was to violate the constitution. We are a republic not a democracy, the minority is protected from the tyranny of the majority.
Report Post »Jim in Houston
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:40amWhen will we the people rise up against judges who make law rather than interpret law?
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:43amThey are interpreting the law. It’s called the Constitution and it is the highest law in the land. State and federal laws, whether enacted by a legislature or through referendum, cannot violate the Constitution’s principles.
What if through a referendum the people of CA or NY voted to outlaw all guns? Would you still say that law should stand, or would you say it is a violation of the Second Amendment?
Report Post »cessna152
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:02am@godfather,
Sharia law should be used in courts? We should be using laws that are outside the scope of our society? Should we apply the law of Mao? Hitler? What do you think about Jesus and Christians praying in public? How about kids praying in school?
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:08am@cessna152
No Sharia Law, or the Ten Commandments, or any other religious laws should not and cannot be used by the courts. The only thing that is considered by the courts in making there rulings are the laws on the books, which in case you did not know does not include Sharia Law or any other religious law. In fact, the First Amendment prevents a court from doing so as that would be a violation of the Establishment clause.
I thought all Blazers were legal scholars. Shouldn’t you know this?
Report Post »BO_Bill
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:10amThe judge in this case, Vicki Miles-LaGrange, is black.
Perhaps Abraham Lincoln was onto something with his whole voting and jury eligibility thing.
Report Post »BertM
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:40amI am really tired of this crap. You can come here and are free to worship God in any way you like, but not to impose your religion by using the Constitution to defend your religion’s laws. Do not attempt to bend the Constitution to your will because there will be a fight on your hands. I say expel all these muslims who want Sharia Law in this land. The problem with them is that their religion is also their government. Well in this country there is one government and it is run by the Constitution of this land and I choose to defend that from all ememies foreign and domestic. CAIR, get the hell out of my country and go back to yours and impose your laws there. We will leave you alone to kill yourselves, but beware of what you do here because you will rouse this sleeping giant and there will be hell to pay.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:46amAre Muslims not prosecuted for murder and all other crimes just like anyone else? Cite one case where a court has considered Sharia law and based its decision on it.
You just don’t like the fact that people different than you live in this country. Muslims who use their religion as a justification are defenseless and should be in jail. However, the majority of Muslims are law-abiding hard working people. I know you will say that this is wrong, which is fine, if you want to continue living as a bigot.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:46ammeant to say “justification for violence”
Report Post »AJAYW
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:58am@Godfather.1
You have convinced yourself – others see beyond your bias message and your understanding of muslims. Sounds like you might be one of those liberal judges Aee
Report Post »Dismayed Veteran
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:11amGodFather
As long as Muslims are tried under Federal and State laws, I have no problem. Shiria law is not Federal or State law nor should it ever be. Our laws are based on English Common Law. Muslims can’t change the basis of American laws. BTW We are talking about law not religion.
Report Post »4truth2all
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:12amYo… Sharia Law is law the condradicts our constitution and NO judge in their stupidty has the right to change that or for that matter the people. If your religion goes against the constitution say goodbye and find another place, but no; they want to change America to suit them.
Report Post »Babeuf
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:14amJudge orders use of Islamic law in Tampa lawsuit over mosque leadership
http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/civil/article1158818.ece
Report Post »Blacktoothgrin
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:44amhttp://shariahinamericancourts.com/
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:53am@BabeUF
You seem to be misunderstanding the case. The judge stated that the dispute should be settled out of court, with the arrangement the two parties had agreed to previously. They both originally agreed to use Sharia as an agreement, then the losing party decided they didn’t like the resolution and brought it to court. The judge said “You already decided this outside of court. Abide by your previous agreement” and threw out the case.
Rather than using Sharia law as his opinion, he simply said “They agreed to use it prior to the court case; they need to abide by that decision.”
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 11:18am“Judge orders use of Islamic law in Tampa lawsuit over mosque leadership”
No different than in NY, where Hasidic Jews cna go through a Jewish arbitraitor instead of the courts to settle civil matters, including divorce.
Report Post »BertM
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 4:14pmI am not a bigot. I do not want the Constitution, which is the law of the land, used to justify Sharia Law. Since Sharia and Islam at times seem inseparable, then the Constitution prevails. No ifs, ands, or buts.
Report Post »AJAYW
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:40am@smithclar3nc3
Yeatell me that ******** when you are living under it
Report Post »flirtpatriot
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:39amJudges should have term limits and be elected by the people, just anthor group of sycophants who are bankrupting our system!
Report Post »Darla_K
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:14amI agree the judges should have term limits just like congress should. Alot of these people that work for us are using their power based on what they “feel”. I think alot of this lawlessness started when we let illegals cross our borders and than we started rewarding them by paying for their healthcare, food, schooling, and many other things. This sends a message to others about how weak we are as a Country and enforcing our laws. Try going to their country and pulling this crap. This is part of taking our country back. Good luck to us the people.
Report Post »SamIamTwo
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:35amAllowing sharia law to creep in is not a good thang…the Okies recognize it but the courts are full of liberals who do not understand the separation of church and state…they are actually allowing Sharia law into the state…as the only religion to do such.
17th century here we come…someone quick get a national petition moving FAST!
The court is telling us that we have to wait till someone is shot before judging…sort of like calling 911 after someone is deaded.
Report Post »txn4justice
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:00amThe Okies need to rally and persevere in the appeals process or they may be singing “I’m proud to be a ***** from Muskogee”.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:05amPoint to one instance where Sharia law is being implemented in the courts or into laws.
Report Post »BertM
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 4:16pmWe do not want it to start.
Report Post »Welcome Black Carter
Posted on January 13, 2012 at 12:25am“Point to one instance where Sharia law is being implemented in the courts or into laws.”
islam is a cancer. At some point it will be terminal.
Report Post »Lordchamp
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:31amHow in the world can ANY judge rule something unconstitutional that WE THE PEOPLE vote for? I can understand if the legislature does it but if it’s an item on a ballot and we vote yes that should be the end of it. PERIOD!! If and until another vote is made to remove it, IT IS LAW!!
If you lose the vote, LIVE WITH IT OF LEAVE!!
What this says is that our votes are worthless. That a single person can overrule us at any given time. How is THAT constitutional??
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:37am“How in the world can ANY judge rule something unconstitutional that WE THE PEOPLE vote for?”
Is this a serious question? If it’s something with enough support, float an amendment to the US Constitution. That’s how to make it Constitutional. WE THE PEOPLE could vote for Sharia law, and it would be unconstitutional, even if 99.9% of the country voted for it. The US is a Federal presidential constitutional republic, not a pure Democracy.
Report Post »maccow
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 2:10pm@Lordchamp
Report Post »To support what Locked said, that we are not governed by majority/mob rule, look at the flip side of your question. How could a vast majority of “We The People” in the South, find it Constitutional to allow slavery and Federal Judges not over rule it? We are a nation of laws, not a nation of majorities. We The People are supposed to be respecters of laws and not of men.
Ray1776
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 3:40pmThis happened in my state of California with Prop 8, eliminating same-sex marriages. The majority voted for it, the 9th Circuit overruled it, and our executive branch refused to defend the people of California’s decision, and I never heard anything from our legislative branch fighting for what the people decided we want in our state. Aside from the problem of giving the judicial branch too much power, we also have an issue with the federal government and our Medical Marijuana Program.
Report Post »smithclar3nc3
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:31amSharia is law based in the religion of Islam
Report Post »quote Sharia law, is the moral code and religious law of Islam. Sharia is derived from two primary sources of Islamic law: the precepts set forth in the Quran, and the …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia –
SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:29amI’m divided on this. On the one hand, the people definitely should have their say, and Sharia has no place in US law. On the other hand, Constitutionality is decided in the courts, and if the courts say something is Unconstitutional, they’re the final authority on the matter (specifically, the higher the court, the closer to the final authority… which rests with the SCotUS).
Seems like if this is enough of an issue (and has such widespread support), it should be made into a Constitutional amendment; that’s the one true way to get by a court ruling.
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:39amYour reasoning is flawless in a world where judges had restraint and did not expand their authority into regions where it does not belong. Reality is, judicial abuse usurped power not delegated to them by the Constitution, thereby making them the rulers of man and not the judges of men.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:45am@The_Jerk
The judiciary has very clear limits. The SCotUS cannot choose or make laws come to them; the lower courts must rule, and the rulings must be appealed until they reach the higher levels. They also have no actually authority to enforce their rulings; though almost always the rulings are enforced, lest the entire system break down.
But I agree; judicial overreach is always a concern, and the Constitution does not explicitly grant the power of judicial review to the courts. However, for over 200 years judicial review has been accepted and utilized in the country… because the Constitution gives no declaration on who has the right of interpretation. It worked well enough for the first generation for US citizens, so it seems a false argument to claim it should be stripped now, as so often is argued on these boards.
Report Post »watashbuddyfriend
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:29am70 percent of Oklahoma voters said NO, which is in concert with the provisions of the US Constitution, but, a ONE JUDGE rule, out of sink with the Constitution, overrules! WAKE UP AMERICA! Send ALL Muslims back to the desert!
ONE JUDGE RULE, and Midnite Judges should be eliminated!
Report Post »conbones
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:51amWe are being invaded and our gov. is encouraging it.
Report Post »They rushing things now they only have till the end
of this year to do what they want if the rite person
is elected. If not you need only look at Africa to see
what will happen.
encinom
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 12:54pmAnd if 99% of voters vote to prohibit mixed raced marriages or outlaw the building of churches or outlaw the newspapers, should the will of the voters also be respected even if it goes against the US Constitution?
Report Post »rt elms
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:28amThis decision makes Newtie’s denunciation of judges seem more reasonable.
Report Post »Babeuf
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:34amNope, apparently people would rather have Mittens. I have no clue why!
Report Post »ChristyJo0354
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:27amWhat happened to “we the people, by the people and for the people”? If we don’t nip this multi-cultural crap in the bud, our country will cease to exist. Remember “united we stand, divided we fall”? People who come to this country must become AMERICAN and abide by AMERICAN LAW, period! If not, it‘s the end of us and don’t think for a minute that the enemy within doesn’t know this. Wake up America!
Report Post »YAHSHUARULES
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:51amThis is far from a “bud” this multi-cultural crap as you call it is in full-bloom – the best we can do is keep it from going to seed and creating generations of this to come to use your analogy. Ever since the 60′s this country has been going on the fast track to hell. I don’t even recognize it anymore. I could write a volume of examples but I think everyone or most everyone on this forum knows. I pray that there are enough awake now to turn this around. And as David Barton said on GBTV the other day one election won’t fix it. Its going to take 20 years to really bring this country back to what the Founders intended. I would add 20 years of fighting for America like we only had one year to do it, but keep doing it with the same resolve and purpose for 20 years. I pray those who love this country are up to the challenge. Glenn Beck also said evil uses the same tactics over and over, but evil learns and gets better at it. We are experiencing honed evil on every front and only by humbling ourselves and praying and turning back to the Almighty do we stand a snowball’s chance in hell of reversing this.
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:37amWhy did you put “we the people, by the people and for the people” in quote marks? That’s not a quote. It’s an incoherent mashup of two quotes.
Report Post »Nemo13
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:27amRemember who are the judges in these courts and get them out.
Report Post »45-ACP
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:25amLOCK & LOAD is the only way.
Report Post »45
txn4justice
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:22amAmazing and disturbing news. Appeals court is the next course of action.
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:35amThis Is the Appeals court, and they didn’t yet strike down the Oklahoma amendment, they just agreed to hear arguments on whether or not it should be struck down.
Report Post »BIGJAYINPA
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:21amWell of couse they would. How dare those ignorant Okies try and outlaw such a peaceful, ration rule of laws like Sharia??? Next thing you know they will be declaring Honor Killings to be against the law. When are you people going to realize that Islam is the wave of the future and just quit fighting and accept your destiny?? Ephesians 6: 10-18…………Just saying.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:40amYou clearly don’t understand what this ruling was about.
First of all, it was not to ban Sharia law. It was to prevent courts from considering Sharia in its rulings.
Second, even if the intention were to ban Sharia law from being practiced, that would be blatantly unconstitutional. You can‘t outlaw a religion because you don’t like it. As for honor killings, those are illegal because it is murder and that will never change.
Report Post »Shupp
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:44amWhat I am getting from this article is that I no longer have to abide by the laws of the United States of America or any local laws therein. The only Law I have to abide by is that of the Bible and since I confer mostly with Catholocism….the law the Vatican Sets forth. I can totally blow off any and all other laws created by United States lawmakers and do whatever the hell I want as long as it is in the juristiction and allowed by my beliefs!
Report Post »rush_is_right
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:56am“The only Law I have to abide by is that of the Bible ”
uh no thats racist, sexist, bigoted and homophobic….
even though islam really is all those things its ok, because its fascism…and thats what we’re becoming….
Report Post »CommonSenseIII
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:14amGodfather – According to your logic, honor killings would be illegal here simply because it is against our law. The whole purpose of this vote was to make sure that no other law than this nation’s law be used in deciding cases. You can be against the fact that it used sharia law as one of it’s examples, but by your own statement it seems that you agree with the spirit of it.
This nation has a history of having the best legal system in the world. That is simply because we are a nation ruled by laws, not by men. These laws are in place to protect your inalienable rights (those given by your Creator) and the other rights declared in our Constitution from somebody else.
With this in mind, why would a court even consider a set of laws that is not rooted in and based on our constitution when rendering a verdict?
It sounds like to me that the 70% that voted actually had the integrity on prestige of our Constitution in mind when they did so. Or would you rather have to think about which area of town you are in to know what laws will or will not apply?
Report Post »Dismayed Veteran
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:35amGodFather
Explain this.
“Awad argued that the ban on Islamic law would likely affect every aspect of his life as well as the execution of his will after his death.”
Your position is not valid. Awad is claiming Islamic law governs his life. It may govern his religious behavior but not the laws of the land. Not in the United States of America. For example, the will in the US is governed by state coupled with State and Federal tax law. Sharia law has no place in this process.
I am a Catholic. My church’s doctrine and is totally different than Southern Baptist doctrine. But we have one thing in common. We are judged by the law of the land not by religious law.
A classic example is liquor laws. Everyone knows not to stand between a Catholic and his/her beer and bingo. In many counties in the southern US, drinking is banned by law. This law reflects the majority opinion of the residents in that county and it reflects their religios beliefs. That makes the law okay. When I went to the South on business, even though I drink, I obey the laws of the county.
What you are seeing is “We The People” at work in the example.
In Oklahoma, 70% of the citizens of that state voted for an ammendment to their State Constitution using the legal process to do so. That is also “We The People” at work.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:59am@Commonsenseiii
“According to your logic, honor killings would be illegal here simply because it is against our law.”
I’m curious if you wrote something incorrectly here. Killing someone (honor killing or not) is illegal precisely because of our laws. If there were no laws, it would be impossible for it be illegal. Immoral, wrong, evil, yes. But legality implies laws and a legal system.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 10:46am@CommonSenseIII
Honor killings are not illegal because of the religious aspect, they are illegal because it is murder. It is that clear and simple. The motivations has nothing to do with it.
And yes, a court should not consider Sharia Law, or another other religious law including the Ten Commandments. In fact, the First Amendment does not allow a court to base a decision on religion as that would be a violation of the Establishment clause. Thus, this law is wholly unnecessary. Furthermore, this law only singles out one religion, Islam, and say that it cannot be considered. A state cannot discriminate between religions, which this law clearly does.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 10:58am@Dismayed Veteran
The difference between this law and dry laws in southern states is that one violates the Constitution and the other does not. Just because something is the will of the people does not mean that it can become law. If a liberal state voted overwhelmingly to ban all guns, would you still say that is ok because it is the will of the people?
As for the plaintiff in this case, he may not quite understand how the law works, but that doesn’t really mean anything. Furthermore, under many states’ laws, you can have your will subjected to whatever scheme you like. Thus, depending on Oklahoma’s laws, it may be possible for his will to be distributed according to Sharia Law but this law would then change that because a court could not consider Sharia Law while distributing his will. Even if this did happen, it would in no way be implementing Sharia Law into the state. It would only be distributing his will as he chooses, keeping in mind that it would still have to comply with all state and federal probate laws.
Your comparison to southern laws is different than this. Those apply to everyone regardless of their religion. If you were an athiest, you still couldn’t drink in those towns. This law, however, only applies to Muslims, which is not allowed under the Constitution.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:17amOnce again we see the progressive movement in action; soon enough it will become that when a US citizen upsets someone of Islam will be judged according to Sharia law and not the US law IN OUR OWN COUNTRY!!!
Report Post »lionB
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:28amThey want international law, that is why they did not uphold it. It isn’t over yet. This is insane.
Report Post »AJAYW
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 8:42amJudges- want to rule our country
Report Post »momrules
Posted on January 11, 2012 at 9:30amSnow……….This is where UN resolution 16/18 comes in. It will criminalize offending them if that offense leads to violence and we all know that ANYTHING that offends a Muslim leads to violence.
Report Post »pamela kay
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:37amSNOWLEOPARD, I am in agreement. This is disturbing news. God Bless you SNOWLEOPARD.
Report Post »