[patriot preacher]

Perhaps the wording needs some work — we’ll let you brilliant lawyers help us out with that. Here’s what I do know:

1. In South Carolina — State Law is the priority EXCEPT in the SPECIFIC cases where the Constitution of the United States gives authority to the Federal Government — and ONLY in those enumerated cases.

2. In NO CASE should “foreign law” take precedence over State law in the lives of the citizens of South Carolina with regard to criminal behavior. Example: Shari’a law regarding MARRIAGE (men can marriage little girls, or up to 4 females) IS NOT ALLOWED! “Honor killing” is not ACCEPTABLE!”

3. In the case of Contract law, foreign trade, etc., that has FAR more to do with FEDERAL law, treaties, etc. than with State law.

It appears there are fewer conflicts than critics claim. In any event, the conflicts CAN be sorted out to protect our STATE (and our NATION) from the evil that is Shari’a Law! And for that matter, our citizens ought not to be subject to any other nations laws on their own soil. Period.

[The Pack Knight]

1. In South Carolina — State Law is the priority EXCEPT in the SPECIFIC cases where the Constitution of the United States gives authority to the Federal Government — and ONLY in those enumerated cases.

That's generally true. However, state law concerning conflict of laws often calls for the application of the law of other states or even of foreign countries when the subject matter of the case occurred in another jurisdiction. Now, conflict of laws is a fairly complicated area of law - there are many multi-volume treatises on the subject and it has evolved in different ways in different states over the last century. Suffice it to say that the aim is to apply the the most appropriate law. For example, it doesn't usually make much sense to apply: South Carolina business organization law to the charter of a company incorporated in England; South Carolina contract law to the issue of whether a contract was formed in Germany; or South Carolina tort law to a car accident that happened in Canada.

Keep in mind that this isn't because the foreign law applies in South Carolina, but rather that South Carolina law has determined that the foreign law is the most appropriate to the case. Also note that South Carolina, like every other state, will generally refuse to apply a foreign law when it would be repugnant to South Carolina public policy.

2. In NO CASE should “foreign law” take precedence over State law in the lives of the citizens of South Carolina with regard to criminal behavior. Example: Shari’a law regarding MARRIAGE (men can marriage little girls, or up to 4 females) IS NOT ALLOWED! “Honor killing” is not ACCEPTABLE!”

That doesn't happen as is. Crimes committed in South Carolina are already tried in South Carolina courts under South Carolina law. No American court applies foreign criminal law to any American criminal trial that I've ever been aware of.

Now, there was that case in New Jersey where a "Sharia defense" was raised in a domestic restraining order case where the husband was accused of spousal rape, which I think is the sort of thing both you and this bill are responding to. The defense was not arguing that Sharia law applied, but rather that the husband actually believe that what he was doing was ok due to his culture, and thus lacked the criminal intent necessary for the restraining order to be issued. This was a ridiculous defense, and while the trial court bought it, it was overturned on appeal.

That case really had less to do with applying a foreign law than it did with a baloney sort of "mistake of law/cultural insanity" defense and a family court judge incompetent enough to buy it. Luckily, the NJ appellate court unanimously rejected it.

3. In the case of Contract law, foreign trade, etc., that has FAR more to do with FEDERAL law, treaties, etc. than with State law.

Actually, you might be surprised to know that you have it more or less backwards. Other than some treaties such as the Covention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG), federal law has virtually nothing to do with international contracts. They are almost entirely a state law matter, even when litigated in federal court. If, say, a South Carolina company makes a contract with a company in Germany, that law will usually be governed either by South Carolina law or German law - there is really no such thing as "federal contract law".

[OldDeckHand]

"Example: Shari’a law regarding MARRIAGE (men can marriage little girls, or up to 4 females) IS NOT ALLOWED! “Honor killing” is not ACCEPTABLE!”

I'm just curious, but do you believe that, without the adoption of this statute, it would be somehow possible for two residents of South Carolina to enter into a private contract that adopts binding arbitration under some kind of Sharia law, where a a US mediator would then, following the relevant foreign law, somehow order or endorse an honor killing and such? You think that's how US federal law and South Carolina law works currently?

"In the case of Contract law, foreign trade, etc., that has FAR more to do with FEDERAL law, treaties, etc. than with State law."

Nope. State judges, all the time, enforce private arbitration agreements, or consent to jurisdiction or forum selection clauses in questions of contract law. All the time.