Appeals courts strikes down Oklahoma Sharia law ban. ACLU: DENVER, CO – A federal appeals court today unanimously upheld a ruling that blocked implementation of a discriminatory and unnecessary Oklahoma state constitutional amendment that would have prohibited state courts from considering what is broadly described as Islamic “Sharia law” and “international law.”  The court concluded that by singling out Islam for unfavorable treatment in state courts, the law likely violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The court rejected the state’s argument that the constitutional amendment was necessary to protect against improper application of Sharia law, explaining:  “Appellants do not identify any actual problem the challenged amendment seeks to solve. Indeed, they admitted … that they did not know of even a single instance where an Oklahoma court had applied Sharia law or used the legal precepts of other nations or cultures, let alone that such applications or uses had resulted in concrete problems in Oklahoma.” “As the court recognized, this amendment did nothing more than target one faith for official condemnation,” said Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief.  “Even the state admits that there has never been any problem with Oklahoma courts wrongly applying religious law. The so-called ‘Save Our State Amendment’ was a solution in search of a problem, and a blatantly discriminatory solution at that.” On the other hand, Oklahoma’s ban was overly broad and stupidly written. A ban on “international law” means that Oklahoma would, by statute, be forced to ignore treaties the United States entered into with other countries. Treaties are international law. This could not possibly be seen as constitutional. Unfortunately, it’s going to take a less hamhanded law being struck down to kill this anti-Sharia legislative hysteria once and for all.
Pop-upView Separately

Appeals courts strikes down Oklahoma Sharia law ban.

ACLU:

DENVER, CO – A federal appeals court today unanimously upheld a ruling that blocked implementation of a discriminatory and unnecessary Oklahoma state constitutional amendment that would have prohibited state courts from considering what is broadly described as Islamic “Sharia law” and “international law.” 

The court concluded that by singling out Islam for unfavorable treatment in state courts, the law likely violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The court rejected the state’s argument that the constitutional amendment was necessary to protect against improper application of Sharia law, explaining: 

“Appellants do not identify any actual problem the challenged amendment seeks to solve. Indeed, they admitted … that they did not know of even a single instance where an Oklahoma court had applied Sharia law or used the legal precepts of other nations or cultures, let alone that such applications or uses had resulted in concrete problems in Oklahoma.”

“As the court recognized, this amendment did nothing more than target one faith for official condemnation,” said Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief.  “Even the state admits that there has never been any problem with Oklahoma courts wrongly applying religious law. The so-called ‘Save Our State Amendment’ was a solution in search of a problem, and a blatantly discriminatory solution at that.”

On the other hand, Oklahoma’s ban was overly broad and stupidly written. A ban on “international law” means that Oklahoma would, by statute, be forced to ignore treaties the United States entered into with other countries. Treaties are international law. This could not possibly be seen as constitutional.

Unfortunately, it’s going to take a less hamhanded law being struck down to kill this anti-Sharia legislative hysteria once and for all.

Source: aclu.org

Print

Recent comments

Blog comments powered by Disqus