You will see from my posting history that I have been unbending in my opinion that islam is a false religion and have no doubt that shariah law is incompatible with our U.S. Constitution, to say nothing of our culture.
But I can reach the result we are discussing without the necessity of acknowledging that islam is a religion.
Suppose you and I have a written agreement to submit any controversy to a jointly approved arbitrator and the agreement further provides the arbitrator will decide the dispute in accordance with the regulations of the American Contract Bridge League.
Suppose further, based on those regulations that the arbitrator finds in your favor and I take it to a judge (and such appeal is allowed by state law). Can there be any doubt as to what the result should be?
I hear what you are saying, but any contract that is not consistant with the law in that State, or violates any US Federal LAW would be null and void. We can make contracts, but they do not supercede US LAW!
Someone on another thread (I wish I could remember who so I could give them proper credit) made the analogy to a dispute over a Bridge Tournament Prize. This is no different from the judge saying “You agreed to the official rules of bridge when you entered into and played the tournament. Therefore, the rules of bridge dictate who won.”