Posted on 03/22/2011 9:23:26 AM PDT by Evil Slayer
TAMPA — The question of what law applies in any Florida courtroom usually comes down to two choices: federal or state.
But Hillsborough Circuit Judge Richard Nielsen is being attacked by conservative bloggers after he ruled in a lawsuit March 3 that, to resolve one crucial issue in the case, he will consult a different source.
"This case," the judge wrote, "will proceed under Ecclesiastical Islamic Law."
Nielsen said he will decide in a lawsuit against a local mosque, the Islamic Education Center of Tampa, whether the parties in the litigation properly followed the teachings of the Koran in obtaining an arbitration decision from an Islamic scholar.
(Excerpt) Read more at tampabay.com ...
Camel. Nose. Tent. ‘Nuff said.
Camel. Nose. Tent. ‘Nuff said.
Unfortunate that this didn’t coem to light a week or so earlier..it would have an effect on our mayoral election runoff..which is today..
I know I am not too bright, but what does this Judge know about Ecclesiastical Islamic law?
Where did he study Islamic law?
The law in nte United States is State Law and Federal law. Any other law is Bull dump. This Judge should be removed from the Bench.
Yep, once they set precedence by accepting it, camels nose under tent, fire this traitor..
There has got to be a way to protect ourselves from these robed poseurs.
This is a slippery slope. The judge is not an expert on Sharia Law. If the party’s of this case want to use Sharia Law as a guide they need to keep it out of the courts, period. If it gets before a Judge then US, FL secular laws must prevail, period. If it was mediated successfully then one party reneged the judge should uphold the results of the mediation.
He has no business looking to Sharia. Where are the “seperation of church and state” leftists? When was the last time we heard a judge say that the he would refer to what the bible says? UNBELIEVABLE
He shouldn’t be deciding this on that basis.
It’s one thing if the parties want to agree to arbitration in a religious court. You can agree to arbitration in any venue, from the Chamber of Commerce to a rabbinical court; but this means that it is no longer in the regular civil court system. The only thing that could involve our court system is if some provision of the arbitration violated US law (for example, you agreed to sell your daughter because the mullah told you to do so).
There is absolutely no excuse for a US judge to be deciding if Islamic law was properly followed in a private arbitration case. US law, yes; Islamic law, no.
Exactly! If this schmuck of a judge wishes to offer his opinion over a dinner hosted at the local mosque, then have at it. But Islamic law has nothing to do with U.S. courts and U.S. judges are not qualified to arbitrate these matters.
I wonder when Judge Judy is going to wade in?
Where is the ACLU complaining about separation of church and state?!!
I’m the high priest of The Church of What’s Happenin’ Now and I order all of you to give me your property!
Remove this idiot judge.
No, this is not a "slippery slope". Judges have been doing this for over 100-years, and private arbitration has been around for most of last century. No problems yet.
The judge is not an expert on Sharia Law."
True. But, US judges aren't "experts" in Talmudic law either. Of course, if were a NY judge, I promise that you would have seen a case or two that applied Talmudic law in some contracts.
Read this part of the story...
"Markus Wagner, a professor of international law at the University of Miami School of Law, said it is not improper for a judge to use foreign law in an arbitration if all the parties agree to do so."If we both sign a contract agreeing to be governed by German law, then Florida courts will interpret German law," he said."
The prickly issue for the judge to have considered in this case, is if the appropriate and responsible legal parties both agreed to be bound by private arbitration. If they did, then they did. They should be bound by the private arbitration decision that they agreed to, even if that private arbitration employees Sharia law.
It happens everyday in court rooms all across America - federal & state - applying all kinds of foreign law clauses.
If he was going to go that route, the best answer would be for the judge to have appointed a rabbinical council from Israel to apply Islamic law to the case. You want religious law? I’ll give you religious law!
Seriously, this is very bad.
I think perhaps, that viewing this finding as a “nose under the tent” for Sharia law is something of a reach. Our country has freedom of religion, which includes the right of churches to settle internal disputes in accordance with their own traditions. Court have historically been loath to interfere in these matters or to try to adjudicate them in the context of the particular faith’s rules, which they consider to be outside their expertise.
If, on the one hand, an older man “marries” an eight year old girl and has relations with her, our courts will state that this matter is in their jurisdiction and is child abuse, regardless of the teachings of any church of which the two might be members.
On the other hand, if my (Orthodox Christian) parish decides to hire their own pastor, the courts will rule that this matter must be decided under the canons of the Orthodox Church, which give that prerogative to the Bishop.
If an American court were to rule that the “marriage” in my first example was legitimate because it was permitted under Sharia law, I think you would have a case.
However, the ruling in the Florida mosque case is in according with our judicial tradition. A ruling in the other direction could have been appealed on the grounds that it constituted interference by the court in the religion of the individuals.
Give it up, man. Nobody is listening.
Apparently not. It’s also becoming increasing clear that no one actually reads the stories before posting. The intellectual case is pretty clearly spelled out in the piece - a piece that has a (wildly) unnecessarily titillating headline.
The Constitution and our individual rights would have been obliterated long ago if it was up to John Q Public and his attempt to save us from evil.
Well, I'm not actually "listening" in the physical sense, of course, but I am paying attention.
And the postings by OldDeckHand and MSU on the issue are informative and seem logical to me.
Just thought you'd like to know.
BTW, I read many, many articles and associated comments without adding any comments myself. I suspect many others do as well. Most times, someone has already posted a better argument than I could have made, so I consider "my" position to be adequately stated.
My point being that just because you may not see a bunch of "right on Bro" posts, doesn't mean that many readers aren't paying attention and agreeing with you.
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.