Watchwoman on the Wall

by Joel McDurmon on Jan 11, 2012

From WaPo,

A proposed constitutional amendment that would ban Oklahoma courts from considering international or Islamic law discriminates against religions, and a Muslim community leader has the right to challenge its constitutionality, a federal appeals court said Tuesday.

The court in Denver upheld U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange’s order blocking implementation of the amendment shortly after it was approved by 70 percent of Oklahoma voters in November 2010.

Muneer Awad, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma, sued to block the law from taking effect, arguing that the Save Our State Amendment violated his First Amendment rights. . . .

The amendment read, in part: “The courts shall not look to the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia law.”

State Sen. Anthony Sykes, who led the Senate effort to get the measure on the ballot, said Tuesday he would continue to fight to lift the injunction.

“The federal appeals court in Denver attempted to silence the voice of 70 percent of Oklahoma voters,” Sykes said in a statement. “At some point we have to decide whether this is a country of by and for the judges, or of by and for the people. How far will the people let them go? This ruling is right along with legalizing abortion and forced busing of school children.”

It is important to note that this decision temporarily upholds the injunction against the Amendment while its actual constitutionality is determined in another court. There is still hope that the will of the people of Oklahoma will be honored within their own State. The First Amendment is a prohibition of the Federal Congress to makes laws interfering with religion. It applies to the Federal level, not necessarily the States which the Tenth Amendment leaves free. States’ Rights could prevail here yet.


Join the Discussion
comments powered by Disqus