Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

These 16 American States Are Trying To Ban Sharia Law
US Herald ^ | Melissa Davis

Posted on 12/14/2016 7:54:20 AM PST by SeekAndFind

With the massive influx of Muslims immigrating to the United States, more and more state and local courts face the introduction of principles of Sharia law in their courtroom, with the result that some states are taking action to ensure that the Constitution continues to be the law of the land.

Alabama has become the most recent state to prohibit consideration of foreign or religious law that might violate the constitutional rights of its citizens.

The states have addressed the issue using various methods including ballot measure, constitutional amendment or legislation. In November, Alabama voters passed “The American and Alabama Laws for Alabama Courts Amendment” for inclusion in the state Constitution by an overwhelming margin of 72 percent to 28 percent.

Alabama joined six other states with similar foreign law bans, including Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana, North Carolina, South Dakota and Tennessee.

Such grassroot bans have drawn severe criticism from Muslim groups, specifically the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), claiming they are discriminatory and Islamophobic.

According to its drafter, Birmingham attorney Eric Johnston, the Alabama amendment does not create any new law nor undermine the religious rights of Muslims, but rather requires judges to consider the religious freedom amendment that has long been a part of existing Alabama law.

“No one’s constitutional rights are affected by it. It’s a reminder to the judges that we need to stick to Alabama laws and public policy.”

A previous ballot measure specifically prohibiting judges from relying on Islamic Sharia law failed in 2012. The new measure carefully avoided using the words “Islamic” and “Sharia.”

Oklahoma voters approved a similar ban using the word “Sharia” in 2010, which was challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and found unconstitutional by a federal appeals court.

A similar Missouri law was vetoed by Gov. Jay Nixon citing concerns of a possible impact on foreign adoptions, opening the way for a revised bill to appear on the Missouri ballot in the near future.

Other states considering similar bans include Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming. Legislation reintroducing the bans with reworded language excluding the use of the word “Sharia” may be forthcoming in Missouri and Oklahoma.


TOPICS: Religion; Society
KEYWORDS: islam; sharialaw; states; usjihad; ussharia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last
See also Wikipedia:
Ban on sharia law

Excerpt:

A ban on sharia law is legislation that would ban the application or implementation of Islamic law (sharia) in courts in any jurisdiction. In the United States, as of 2014 seven states have "banned Sharia law", or passed some kind of ballot measure that "prohibits the states courts from considering foreign, international or religious law."

Outside of the US, sharia has become a political issue in several non-Muslim majority countries, with a petition to ban Sharia councils circulated in the United Kingdom.

1 posted on 12/14/2016 7:54:20 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

That’ll show ‘em.


2 posted on 12/14/2016 7:56:23 AM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"Alabama has become the most recent state to prohibit consideration of foreign or religious law that might violate the constitutional rights of its citizens. "

- Roll Tide -

3 posted on 12/14/2016 7:56:55 AM PST by blam (Jeff Sessions For President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yes. More. Faster.


4 posted on 12/14/2016 7:59:26 AM PST by Noumenon (Proud Irredeemable Deplorable, heavily armed Infidel. Islam delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
Such grassroot bans have drawn severe criticism from Muslim groups, specifically the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), claiming they are discriminatory and Islamophobic.

Who gives a f#ck what CAIR thinks? Just DO it.

5 posted on 12/14/2016 7:59:30 AM PST by Mich Patriot (Democrat is the new communist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Why is this even necessary? A law or ruling either follows the constitution, or doesn’t, in which case it is invalid.


6 posted on 12/14/2016 8:01:12 AM PST by To Hell With Poverty (I support a woman's right to lose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

They should add ‘tribal law’ to the legislation.

I heard that’s how sharia seeped into Canadian law, as tribal law.


7 posted on 12/14/2016 8:01:12 AM PST by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies ('45 will be the best ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Every state needs to ban Sharia, it is completely incompatible with our laws and customs.

Islam is here to supplant our laws and customs.

Islam has always been a war plan for world domination.

They are commanded by their prophet to implement sharia and subject everyone to it, by any means necessary.


8 posted on 12/14/2016 8:07:54 AM PST by Lurkinanloomin (Natural Born Citizen Means Born Here Of Citizen Parents)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
These 16 American States Are Trying To Ban Sharia Law

How could sharia law ever come up, or be applied in any official setting when it hasn't been passed by the legislature, signed by the governor and codified?

9 posted on 12/14/2016 8:14:08 AM PST by The Sons of Liberty (Trump is not even President yet, but he has already accomplished more than 8 yrs of 0bama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
It is ALREADY incompatible with The Constitution. I am sick of these bureaucrats passing new laws to make something illegal that is already illegal.

You have to be careful of their true intentions with these, too.

One of their tactics is to “repeal to a new position”.

You start with a current law, A. You WANT TO go to C but you know the people would never vote for it...

So you pass law B. B is the OPPOSITE of C.

Then they file suit against B that goes to a judge for interpretation.

Liberal judge says B is ‘unconstitutional’, so the OPPOSITE of B must be true, or C.

Notice they didn't ‘repeal’ the law and go BACK TO A. They ‘repealed to a new position’ C, which is what they wanted all along.

They went from A to C via the court, not the legislature.

They did this with Gays in the Military. They instituted “Don't Ask Don't Tell” (which some might argue was the policy all along) and then took DADT to court and ‘repealed’ it- to go to a whole new position: Open Gays in the military.

They did the same thing with Gay Marriage. They passed a poorly written law banning it, then repealed that - so the opposite became law: Gay Marriage must now be allowed in every State.

WATCH FOR THEM TO TRY THIS WITH SHARIA LAW!
They pass a law saying it is illegal, declare that law ‘unconstitutional and ‘repeal’ it to say Sharia must be legal.

10 posted on 12/14/2016 8:17:00 AM PST by Mr. K ( Trump kicked her ass 2-to-1 if you remove all the voter fraud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

guess this means the Amish can’t “shun” anymore. /s


11 posted on 12/14/2016 8:18:05 AM PST by Palio di Siena
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Why not all 50?


12 posted on 12/14/2016 8:18:50 AM PST by TNoldman (AN AMERICAN FOR A MUSLIM/BHO FREE AMERICA. (Owner of Stars and Bars Flags))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: To Hell With Poverty
Why is this even necessary? A law or ruling either follows the constitution, or doesn’t, in which case it is invalid.

It really isn't but it looks good to the voters.

13 posted on 12/14/2016 8:22:09 AM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ban Sharia law and Islam.


14 posted on 12/14/2016 8:28:19 AM PST by 353FMG (AMERICA IS ALL THAT TRULY MATTERS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The United States Constitution already bans sharia law.


15 posted on 12/14/2016 8:47:53 AM PST by WayneS (An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Needs to happen now sooner rather than later.


16 posted on 12/14/2016 8:49:56 AM PST by rodguy911 (Go Sarah go! America home of the free because of the brave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This is rediculous, let’s say I make up a law unto myself that says I can rob banks and then I do and get caught. The laws I created don’t mean squat. We don’t have to ban a foreing legal system. I think by banning it they will infact legitimize it.


17 posted on 12/14/2016 8:52:34 AM PST by Trump-a-licious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

No additional law is needed. The laws of the state and country are in effect. shitaria laws contradict those laws, and are therefore invalid.
Anyone who comes here promoting shitaria is not eligible to be a citizen or to stay, since shitaria promotes the violent overthrow of our government.


18 posted on 12/14/2016 8:55:55 AM PST by I want the USA back (Lying Media: completely irresponsible. Complicit in the destruction of this country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: To Hell With Poverty
Why is this even necessary? A law or ruling either follows the constitution or doesn’t, in which case it is invalid.

Exactly right. That seems to me to be a core question.

Although it would seem appropriate for a court to recognize Sharia law if such is an express term in a contract between private parties, such term has no bearing on other parties. To allow a religious law to somehow gain a foothold as a "common commercial practice" and thus applicable to all is, at the least, an affront to the local legislature.

19 posted on 12/14/2016 9:09:34 AM PST by frog in a pot (When is the time to question whether a "religion" with a totalitarian agenda is a 1stA religion?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: To Hell With Poverty

Why is this even necessary? A law or ruling either follows the constitution, or doesn’t, in which case it is invalid.
****************
Because we have rats in the Supreme Court that entertain foreign law in their decisions. They should be impeached.


20 posted on 12/14/2016 9:27:54 AM PST by Neidermeyer (Bill Clinton is a 5 star general in the WAR ON WOMEN and Hillary is his Goebbels.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson