Last week, the city of Irving, Texas, supported a bill pending in the state House that would ensure that state laws would trump all foreign laws. Muslims in the community saw this as an obstruction of a newly established Sharia court, however.
A contract provision involving the marriage relationship providing that the forum to resolve a dispute arising under the contract is located outside the states and territories of the United States is void if the foreign law that would be applied to dispute in that forum would, as applied, violate a fundamental right guaranteed by the United States Constitution or the Constitution of this state.
An Islamic court using Sharia law was established in nearby Dallas earlier this year, Breitbart reported in January. One of its “judges” said that taking part in the court is “voluntary.” One who observes the Muslim faith cannot obtain a divorce, or “Talaq,” without the approval of the Islamic court.
“[W]hile participation in the tribunal is voluntary, a married couple cannot be considered divorced by the Islamic community unless it is granted by the tribunal,” Dr. Taher El-badawi, one of the judges, explained to Breitbart.
“The courts of the United States of America are costly and consist of ineffective lawyers. Discontent with the legal system leads many Muslims in America to postpone justice in this world and opt for an audience on the Day of Judgment,” per the description on the Islamic Tribunal’s website:
It is with this issue that Muslims here in America are obligated to find a way to solve conflicts and disputes according to the principles of Islamic Law and its legal heritage of fairness and justice in a manner that is reasonable and cost effective. These proceedings must be conducted in accordance with the law of the land; local, state and federal within the United States.
Through effective mediation and arbitration, decisions can be made that are stipulated in the Shari’ah and adhering to the binding, ethical and legal code that exists within this country with the final approval of the relevant courts and judges. Islamic Tribunal or IT is established exactly for this purpose.
“This bill does not reference Sharia, Islam or even religion. It has nothing to do with preventing any tribunal,” Irving Mayor Beth Van Duyne said at the meeting. Van Duyne has been a vocal proponent of the bill. “Why anyone would feel this is hatred or bigotry is absolutely beyond me.”
In a Facebook post ahead of the vote, Van Duyne made her point clear. “[T]he fundamental principles that formed our nation, protect our rights and guarantee liberties unmatched anywhere must not be sacrificed as our nation embraces other cultures. Reaffirming that our courts will consider matters based on AMERICAN laws and statutes is, therefore, necessary,”
Over 500 people came to debate the bill ahead of the vote, including many in the Muslim community who raised objections. “[The bill] fuels anti-Islamic hysteria,” Zia Sheikh, imam at the Islamic Center of Irving told the Dallas Morning News. “Her whole point was to rile up her supporters…The problem is we become the whipping boys.”
h/t: BizPac Review
This post originally appeared on Western Journalism - Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom