News that doesn't receive the necessary attention.

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Oklahoma shockingly to assert US law over Sharia

What, no "honor killings"? An outrage. The ABC News article does the usual routine. Instead of looking at many available details to support such action, it's more interested in casting Oklahoma and its lawmakers as paranoid nut-cases. A la Alinsky and Soros.
The ban is a cornerstone of a "Save our State" amendment to the Oklahoma constitution that was recently approved by the Legislature.
  • The amendment -- which also would forbid judges from using international laws as a basis for decisions -- will now be put before Oklahoma's voters in November. Approval is expected.

Oklahoma has few Muslims – only 30,000 out of a population of 3.7 million. The prospect of sharia being applied there seems remote. But a chief architect of the measure, Republican State Rep. Rex Duncan, calls the proposed ban a necessary "preemptive strike" against Islamic law coming to the state.

Sharia – which means "path" in Arabic – governs many aspects of Muslim life and influences the legal code in a majority of Muslim countries.

Sharia has gained a toehold in some western countries, notably Great Britain, where five sharia courts have been established to settle certain disputes among Muslims, with the government's blessing.

The proposed Oklahoma amendment is aimed, in part, at "cases of first impression," legal disputes in which there is no law or precedent to resolve the matter at hand.

  • In such cases, judges might look to laws or rulings in other jurisdictions for guidance. The proposed amendment would block judges in Oklahoma courts from drawing on sharia, or the laws of other nations, in such decisions.

The amendment also is a response to what some conservatives see as a pernicious trend -- cases of liberal judges mostly notably Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, using foreign laws to shape their opinions in U.S. cases.

  • "It should not matter what France might do, what Great Britain might do, or what the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia might do," Duncan said.
  • "Court decisions ought to be based on federal law, or state law."...

"I think this is a political statement against Muslims and, inferentially, in support of United States values," (Fordham University law professor Jim) Cohen said.

  • Duncan said that is not the case. "The only entities that could oppose this measure are those that admittedly support applying international law and sharia law in American courts.

If that's what they think they need to be bold enough to say so.""

No comments:


Blog Archive

About Me

My photo
I'm the daughter of an Eagle Scout (fan of the Brooklyn Dodgers and Mets) and a Beauty Queen.