The original map was quite low-quality, so I created a new one that might be a bit more readable in a blog-post format. The Mother Jones piece was published on February 11, so this list may be somewhat out of date:
Passed: Both Tennessee and Louisiana passed variations of the American Public Policy Alliance’s “American Law for American Courts” legislation in 2010.
Working on it: Alaska; Arkansas; Arizona; Georgia; Indiana; Kansas; Nebraska; Oklahoma; South Carolina; South Dakota; Texas; Wyoming.
Tried but Failed: Florida; Mississippi; Utah.
The distribution of sharia-opposing states is interesting. Sad to say, my own state is not included among those that are at least attempting to ban sharia.
With the exception of Indiana — how did it get in there? — and the libertarian-minded states of the far northern Midwest, which are mysteriously absent, the Islamophobic states seem to cluster in the heart of red-state America.
Bear in mind that the most effective sharia ban — one that won’t get overturned by the nearest panel of federal judges — is one that never mentions Islam or sharia. “A body of foreign law that is contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America” — that’s the sort of wording we need.
Here’s what Tim Murphy at Mother Jones had to say about all this:
Earlier this week, a Georgia legislator introduced the “American Laws for Georgia Courts Act,” a bill designed to block the implementation of Islamic law in state courts. As state rep. Mike Jacobs told the Fulton County Daily Report, he couldn’t think of any specific instance of Sharia law affecting Georgia’s justice system, but the government needed to take action. It’s a familiar pattern: While actual Islamic law is virtually non-existent in the United States, efforts to combat the scourge of Islamic law are becoming increasingly common.
Just how common? According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 13 states have introduced legislation to prevent courts from using foreign or religious law in their decisions. But that’s just in the last two months; if you include last year’s efforts—including Arizona’s inspired attempt to ban karma —it goes all the way up to 16.
Hat tip: AC.
7 comments:
American Public Policy Alliance
produced a nineteen page report outlining Civil Legal Cases involving Shariah Law already being addressed in the following state courts:
1. Illinois - inmates demand halal slaughtered meat in prison
2. Louisiana - child custody per shariah
3. Maryland - Shariah divorce, child custody
4. Massachusetts - alternate forum (Saudi Arabia) to resolve dispute
5. Michigan - shariah divorce
6. Minnesota - Islamic arbitration
7. New Jersey - marital rape under sharia defense
8. New York - Yemeni fights deportation using sharia
9. Ohio - Islamic Mahr Agreements in Civil Courts
10. Tennessee - shariah legitimates polygamy and "expertise" in Islamic studies
11. Texas - Mahr agreement dispute & divorce
12. Florida - Tampa court orders case to proceed under ecclesiastical Islamic law pursuant to the qur'an
Finally cause for hope.
Congress should pass a law like this, but the current Supreme Court would declare it unconstitutional.
Bear in mind that the most effective sharia ban — one that won’t get overturned by the nearest panel of federal judges — is one that never mentions Islam or sharia. “A body of foreign law that is contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America” — that’s the sort of wording we need.
Le bingo.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 13 states have introduced legislation to prevent courts from using foreign or religious law in their decisions.
Murphy says that like its a bad thing. What's up with this anyway? Aren't Liberals usually foaming at the mouth about separation of church and state?
Given the brutal misogyny of shari'a law, separation of mosque and state should be a no-brainer for these bleeding hearts.
But noooooooooooooooo!! [/Belushi]
Richard: Congress should pass a law like this, but the current Supreme Court would declare it unconstitutional.
All the more reason for ratifying a Constitutional amendment that overturns lifetime appointments to the US Supreme Court.
But noooooooooooooooo!! [/Belushi]
LOL!
FWIW: US Constitution vs. Sharia law
The comparative summary at the above link highlights the serious disconnects between the provisions of the US Constitution and those of Sharia Law.
You have to ban Shari'a law.
Separation of Church and State.
The alternative is to fight it on a case by case basis. Banning would be simpler. We could even make it a blanket ban: "No law shall be passes in [this state] which derives from any religious tradition".
(Of course, we'd then have to explain how things like murder, stealing, &c, derive not from the Bible but from English Common law.)
in response to ZZMik:
Yes,Sharia is incompatible with the US Constitution as is the interference of Christian fundamentalists who want to teach children that the planet is only six thousand years old.
"(Of course, we'd then have to explain how things like murder, stealing, &c, derive not from the Bible but from English Common law.)"
and where do you think English Common law can from?
Post a Comment
All comments are subject to pre-approval by blog admins.
Gates of Vienna's rules about comments require that they be civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum. For more information, click here.
Users are asked to limit each comment to about 500 words. If you need to say more, leave a link to your own blog.
Also: long or off-topic comments may be posted on news feed threads.
To add a link in a comment, use this format:
<a href="http://mywebsite.com">My Title</a>
Please do not paste long URLs!
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.