Posted on 05/17/2011 9:47:22 PM PDT by Nachum
More critical analysis from the nation's leading legal mind on sharia law in America, David Yerushalmi.
New Study Finds Shariah Law Involved in Court Cases in 23 States CSP
Washington, DC, May 17, 2011 - The Center for Security Policy today released an in-depth study-- Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases. The study evaluates 50 appellate court cases from 23 states that involve conflicts between Shariah (Islamic law) and American state law. The analysis finds that Shariah has been applied or formally recognized in state court decisions, in conflict with the Constitution and state public policy.
Some commentators have tried to minimize this problem, claiming, as an editorial in yesterday’s Los Angeles Times put it that, “…There is scant evidence that American judges are resolving cases on the basis of shariah.” To the contrary, our study identified 50 significant cases just from the small sample of appellate court published cases.
Others have asserted with certainty that state court judges will always reject any foreign law, including Shariah law, when it conflicts with the Constitution or state public policy. The Center’s analysis, however, found 15 trial court cases, and 12 appellate court cases, where Shariah was found to be applicable in these particular cases.
The facts are the facts: some judges are making decisions deferring to Shariah law even when those decisions conflict with constitutional protections.
On the releasing the study, the Center for Security Policy’s President, Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., observed:
"These cases are the stories of Muslim American families, mostly Muslim women and children, who were asking American courts to preserve their rights to equal protection and due process. These families came to America for freedom from the discriminatory and cruel laws of Shariah. When our courts then apply Shariah law in the lives of these families, and deny them equal protection, they are betraying the principles on which America was founded."
Key Findings:
• At the trial court level, 22 decisions were found that refused to apply Shariah; 15 were found to have utilized or recognized Shariah; 9 were indeterminate; and in 4 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision at this level, but was applicable at the appellate level.
• At the appellate Court level: 23 decisions were found that refused to apply Shariah; 12 were found to have utilized or recognized Shariah; 8 were indeterminate; and in 7 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision, but had been applicable at the trial court level.
• The 50 cases were classified into seven distinct “Categories” of dispute: 21 cases dealt with “Shariah Marriage Law”; 17 cases involved “Child Custody”; 5 dealt with “Shariah Contract Law”; 3 dealt with general “Shariah Doctrine”; 2 were concerned with “Shariah Property Law”; 1 dealt with “Due Process/Equal Protection” and 1 dealt with the combined “Shariah Marriage Law/Child Custody.”
• The 50 cases were based in 23 different states: 6 cases were found in New Jersey; 5 in California; 4 each in Florida, Massachusetts and Washington; 3 each in Maryland, Texas and Virginia; 2 each in Louisiana and Nebraska; and 1 each in Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio and South Carolina.
Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases includes summaries of a sample of twenty cases, as well as the full published texts for all fifty cases.
Mr. Gaffney added:
“This study represents a timely contribution to the debate developing around the country: To what extent is the Islamic politico-military-legal doctrine of Shariah being insinuated into the United States? The analysis complements and powerfully reinforces the warnings contained in the Center’s bestselling 2010 “Team B II” Report, Shariah: The Threat to America. It confirms that Shariah’s adherents are making a concerted effort to bring their anti-constitutional code to this country.
“Together with follow-on analyses now in preparation, we hope to equip those who share the Center’s commitment to the Constitution of the United States, to the liberties it guarantees and to the democratic government it mandates to thwart those like the Muslim Brotherhood who would supplant freedom with Shariah law. Clearly, we must work to keep America Shariah-free, or risk inexorably losing the country we love.”
The full text of the study, including text from the court cases and tables displaying the findings, can be found at www.ShariahInAmericanCourts.com.
This is the USA, not Arabland.
If so called Arab Americans want to live under Sharia Law then let them go back to bum **** Arabland.
Six Cases in NJ, not surprising. Only one case in MI, very surprising.
IMHO...
We need a halt on all immigration except for cherry-picking the line.
Being the richest nation with a population of over 300,000,000 and tens of millions of unemployed means that we are not in dire need of getting more people into the U.S., or any particular person really. Anyone who stands there with a straight face and tells you that we “need immigration” hasn’t done the math, does not understand how today differs from a hundred years ago (low-wage earners are exactly what we have too many of, we need to get workers able to produce more and get paid more for doing real work), or they’re simply trying to get more cheap labor for big business.
Therefore, to think that we would allow anyone from an islamic country in, where people range from merely hating the U.S. and Israel to being outright militant towards us, is lunacy.
It only stands to reason that islamburg, ny and all such populations need to be sent back where they came from.
We humor far too many of our enemies, allowing them to not only establish a base of operations, but to join our government. It is national suicide and will result in horrific turmoil eventually.
“some judges are making decisions deferring to Shariah law even when those decisions conflict with constitutional protections.”
Who could have predicted this ? Maybe the best we can hope for now may be for may be for our law schools to practice “Living Sharia” into our judicial system, and hope that it spreads to the Middle East. If they’re as silly as we westerners we may see Muslim women executing their husbands for improper conduct with the neighbor’s goat. What about Arab students agitating for a “Ground Zero Church” to be erected at the site of Qaddhafi’s bombed out house?
These cases are the stories of Muslim American families, mostly Muslim women and children, who were asking American courts to preserve their rights to equal protection and due process.
Sorry about that. It looks like some “progressive” American judges are reinforcing the idea that women and children are still the property of the husband. The husband wants to beat you? It’s his right. The father wants to sell his daughter to his brother? It’s his right.
And appellate judges approve? How long before these judges apply the same standard to non-Muslims?
“Muslim Family Court legalities” would seem to be an oxymoron.
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.