Posted by: maboulette | January 12, 2012

COURT: OKLAHOMA CAN’T ENFORCE SHARIA LAW BAN

English: Picture of Billboard put up by the Un...

DENVER (Reuters) – A federal appeals court upheld an injunction against a voter-approved ban on Islamic law in Oklahoma on Tuesday, saying it likely violated the U.S. Constitution by discriminating against religion.

A three-member panel of the Denver-based U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that the rights of plaintiff Muneer Awad, a Muslim man living in Oklahoma City, likely would be violated if the ban on Sharia law takes effect.

The decision upholds the ruling of a lower federal court.

“While the public has an interest in the will of the voters being carried out … the public has a more profound and long-term interest in upholding an individual’s constitutional rights,” the appeals court said in a 37-page written decision.

The Washington, D.C.-based Council on American-Islamic Relations welcomed the ruling, calling it “a victory for the Constitution and for the right of all Americans to freely practice their faith.”

Oklahoma‘s “Save Our State Amendment,” which was approved by 70 percent of state voters in 2010, bars Oklahoma state courts from considering or using Sharia law.

The lawsuit challenging the measure was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of Awad, who is director of the Oklahoma chapter of CAIR.

A federal judge in Oklahoma City issued a court order in November 2010 barring the measure from taking effect while the case is under review, finding a substantial likelihood that Awad would prevail on the merits.

The Council said the Oklahoma amendment is among 20 similar proposed laws introduced in state legislatures nationwide.

Defenders of the amendment say they want to prevent foreign laws in general, and Islamic Sharia law in particular, from overriding state or U.S. laws.

But foes of the Oklahoma measure, also called State Question 755, have argued that it stigmatizes Islam and its adherents and violates the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment prohibition against the government favoring one religion over another.

State Senator Anthony Sykes, one of the measure’s sponsors, called the decision an attempt “to silence the voice of 70 percent of Oklahoma voters. 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.”

Opponents also say it could nullify wills or legal contracts between Muslims because they incorporate by reference specific elements of Islamic prophetic traditions.


Responses

  1. Last I checked this was still America where our laws and regulations are based on our Constitution which like it or not is based on Judeo/Christian values and principles. This judge is wrong, plain and simple. If this Muslim man wants to live by laws based on Islamic fundamentalism I suggest he emigrates to somewhere that bases their rules and laws on that such as iran, Afghanistan or maybe the People’s new place of Islamic freedom Egypt or Libya. I find absolutely nothing wrong with the system that we’ve chosen to live by for the last 200+ years


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Categories

%d bloggers like this: