Posted on 11/24/2010 8:57:33 AM PST by neverdem
What a stupid argument. A will would not be invalidated for incorporating muslim teachings unless the will somehow violated state or federal law. For him to make that argument, he must demonstrate how the teachings fo Mohammed incorporated into the will violate state or federal estate law. In so doing, he would actually be making a pretty good case in SUPPORT of the amendment passed by the voters.
CA judges do it all the time. It’s really alarming when OK judges go berserk.
This will be appealed to the Fifth Circuit, which is dominated by Reagan and Bush appointees. I expect the ruling will be gutted.
What about old Navajo law, or old Apache law, or old Soiux law, they were here first. Did the judge consider all of them?????
Ooops, I meant Tenth Circuit...
or Mormon, Hutterite, Mennonite, or Crusader Christians?
Too many educated idiots out there!
I don't think simply appealing rulings like this and waiting for sanity to strike is enough anymore. So, which of these other options do you think would be preferable?
1) Ignore the ruling, certify the election, and go on with life; or
2) on the theory that the just authority of real judges (as opposed to this ungulate) would suffer if we flout stupid rulings, start a multi-year, Congressional campaign to impeach and remove all judges who flagrantly ignore or disobey the Constitution as written.
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby..."
Time to begin impeachment proceedings.
The Mormons were made to change their religious beliefs (in polygamy) as condition of Utah statehood. Now Mohammedans have succeeded in establishing THEIR law over all of us.
Judge, FU.
Miles-LaGrange is to rule next week.
she extended a temp restraining order blocking the results of the referendum.
and, BTW, the NJ judge's ruling was overturned.
THERE ARE AN ARMY OF LIKE-MINDED JUDGES AND LAWYERS OUT THRE, STANDING IN LINE FOR WORK LIKE THIS.
AND THERE IS NOT A SINGLE POS LEGAL-DEGREED INDIVIDUAL WHO WILL GO TO COURT AGAINST A BLATANT VIOLATION OF THE US CONSTITUTION!
Pardon me for yelling, but I am WAAAAY passed PO’ed.
The judge is ill informed as to what Sharia represents and means.
It means basically that their system wherever it takes root is to supplant and replace existing governments as theirs is superior and supreme. All of this is done here under the guise of what we call religious freedom.
Islam is not a religion, it is political, military all rolled into one with maybe 30% religion. It is a aggressive imperialist invasive force destined for domination unless people recognize it for what it is. That judge? Needs to look at a history book.
It is not at all what the founding forefathers had in mind when they thought of religion. Islam? Is a destructive trojan.
There never should have been a voter referendum to mandate that the courts follow the law (and NOT use Sharia Law) they are already supposed to follow the law (our law)
This gave them an excuse to challenge it, and strike it down with some feeble excuse, thereby giving people exactly what they didn't want.
The people never would have voted for a law requiring sharia law.
So the muzzie supporters did the two-step: They passed a law banning sharia law, so they could overturn that, and claim it means they CAN use sharia law.
Want gay marriage? pass a law banning it, then declare that law unconstitutional- viola: Gay Marriage
They use this all the time on us- and we keep falling for it.
Instead of passing a new law saying we will obey the old law, we should just obey the old laws.
Then fire anyone who fails to do their job.(impeach? how the hell do you get rid of judges?)
We see no distinction in quality between Islamic terrorism and Sharia law: only a distinction in degree.
So, what if that Sharia laws forbids a woman as judge? What if a religion is brought to court that bans blacks as anything but slaves?
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.