Order Blocks Oklahoma Constitutional Amendment

newsok.com ^ | November 8, 2010 | Tim Talley

[gwjack]

A temporary restraining order has been issued to block a state constitutional amendment that prohibits state courts from considering international or Islamic law when deciding cases. U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange handed down the ruling this morning in Oklahoma City following a brief hearing.

[RetiredArmy]

IT IS ABOUT STATES RIGHTS!!! Oklahoma you do what you want. It is YOUR state. Not the federal government’s, certainly not the murdering cult of izzlum. Tell the feds to go to heck and do what you want. Ignore them.

[truthfree]

Constitutional amendment is unconstitutional?? how exactly?

Because it's an amendment to the STATE Constitution.

She ruled that there is a good enough chance that it violates the US Constitution or Federal law that it should be blocked until the courts can make a decision.

Federal law always trumps State law.

[Candor7]

REALLY CRUCIAL:

[GeronL]

I don’t remember anything in the US Constitution that would be contrary.

[FourPeas]

We live in interesting times. Islamists say there’s no chance that sharia would be used in Oklahoma courts, but complain because banning such discriminates against them.

[bgill]

Why are these freaks here? If they don’t like America or it’s laws, then stay the heck back in that third world desert and leave well enough alone. When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

[Cletus.D.Yokel]

I woould think that the governor should protect his citizens by going to the following route:

“By referendum, the people of Oklahoma have made a law for Oklahoma. The decision by the federal judge ordering a stay is OF NO EFFECT. Oklahoma will ignore the order.”

[StAnDeliver]

Ok, so what we need here is a Constitutional Amendment that says Federal judges may only be retained for 4 years by the people they purport to represent after which they stand for a vote (you would retain/not retain the judges in your Circuit).

Yes, I know that would eventually remove some Conservative judges as well, but the bulk of the removals would be Leftists, and there are many who prefer the substantial paycheck to real work, ie, you would see a significant number of weak Leftist judges yield to the supreme power of Constitutionalism in order to save their McMansions and bigazz retirement.

Actually I would do something simpler like have judges removed if they are overruled three times after directly contravening the Constitution. But an Amendment is what must be done.

BTW, this is no accident -- these judges are "sending up" these cases (Cali, Iowa, etc.) because they believed The One Term would appoint 3 Supremes in his second term.

Those of you who move exclusively in Conservative circles (luckily) have no idea how much Demogeddon2010 has shook up Leftists down to their rotten core...

[tutstar]

isn’t it?

[truthfree]

That’s why I used the term “She ruled that...”

[Candor7]

Yes. Crucial.

Political Correctness vs.The Rule of Law

Couldn’t be a clearer case of it.

Liberal Fascism vs. The Republic

This will result in a slap down, or alternatively, eventual public disorder.

In the latter case, the Muslims would be up one more notch.

[little jeremiah]

OMG.

I can’t breathe after reading this.

The muz loving leftists obviously are not going to give up quietly.

[Darksheare]

We wish.
Odds of it happening are slim though.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks gwjack. Federal courts have no jurisdiction under international law or shariah law, so the "block" is imaginary. Nyah nyah.

...a state constitutional amendment that prohibits state courts from considering international or Islamic law when deciding cases. U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange handed down the ruling this morning in Oklahoma City following a brief hearing.

[little jeremiah]

Judges are now worse than lawyers. Amazing.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Yes, judges CAN be removed. The HOUSE of REPRESENTATIVES can IMPEACH a judge.

The SENATE of the UNITED STATES then has the duty to have a TRIAL for any impeached official.

Look, the Constitution does not provide for Sharia Law, and more importantly it does not provide for JUDGES ignoring the 10th Amendment of the United States. This judge has PLAINLY ignored that part of our national charter.

She need to be removed. Start doing this crap NOW, and we’ll send a message to the rest of the liberty-hating judiciary: we’re not gonna take it anymore.

[takenoprisoner]

CAIR understands the important of this: it erects a firewall against the gradual implementation of Sharia. If the amendment stands, it will becpome a model nationwide and it will spur an elightened disucssion of Islam and Sharia. They want to fly under the radar.

You betcha! The long term goal of Islam is to convert America to Sharia law. Thus, all small fires like this one kindled in Oklahoma must be stomped out before, like you say, it becomes a model for all of the states...putting a choke hold on the goals of Islam in America.

It's already happened in Europe. Islam has it's eye on the big prize. USA.

[moovova]

Agreed!

[ducttape45]

Un-by-God believable. Another case of a liberal judge throwing out the will of the people. It’s time to make federal judges be accountable by elections and term limits.

[Hoodat]

They ruled the Constitution to be unconstitutional?