Skip to comments.Judge blocks Oklahoma ban on Shariah law
Posted on 11/08/2010 9:15:53 PM PST by garybob
A federal judge in Oklahoma has issued a temporary restraining order barring the state from adopting a constitutional amendment voters passed last week that forbids state courts from enforcing Islamic law, also known as Shariah.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
this judge needs to be impeached for mental problems.... in other words, for being a traitor to the United States of America... NOT the nasty cults in the far east.
OK SHOULD TELL THE JUDGE TO EAT **** AND IMPLEMENT IT ANYWAY.
Braking news - public bans judge!
Judge Vicki? HAHAHHAHAA
Let’s review, could Vicki be a judge in...
say... Suadi Arabia? Iraq? Iran? Pakistan?
Wow! She should be disbarred for even a temporary stay.
“Sharia is no less toxic when it comes to the sorts of democratic government and civil liberties guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. According to this legal code of Saudi Arabia and Iran, only Allah can make laws, and only a theocrat can properly administer them, ultimately on a global basis.”
- former Assistant Secretary of Defense Frank Gaffney
Too stupid to realize that she would be the first victim of Sharia law.
Don’t judges swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution? He needs to be removed from office.
Pardon me...I didn’t realize it was a she, which is even more ironic since she couldn’t even drive a car under Sharia law. Thanks, Bill Clinton, for another worthless affirmative action judge.
right? How can a judge overturn a constitutional amendment? That is the one thing that overrides terrible judges...
So a single judge has more power than all the citizen voters of a state? Unbelievable!
What state court in Oklahoma would even try to impose
Even though the judge is an idiot, it seems like a non issue
A “judge” bars Oklahoma from implementing a constitutional amendment, duly voted by the people of Oklahoma, in FAVOR of allowing Shariah Law to be used in Oklahoma courts???
God help us. Literally. Please.
Why was this even up for a vote?
Tell this “judge” to go pound sand...
Better yet, drag his sorry butt from the bench and throw this treasonous rump swab down a flight of stairs!
I am getting so fed up with “federal” ... Screw the whole damned federal government... They can all go straight to hell.
This needs to go straight to the Supreme Court and be decided once an for all.
Well, if we are lucky.
You can say it...shiite!
Most likely, this amendment was little more than a political stunt to bring more people to the polls.
They aren't afraid because they know that they, today's holders of power, will remain in power. Only their offices will be renamed.
Here is an example. In the old USSR there were thousands of Party bosses. Then USSR fell. Do you think those Party bosses were lined up against the wall and shot? No way. They took over the reforms and became leaders of the change, changing their "beliefs" as a snake changes his skin. In the end they became filthy rich, having purchased (for token money or for free) most of the industry.
This example is not lost on the USA, and politicians here know exactly what to do and how to do it to remain in power. They may need to change their faith, their allegations, their friends and everything else - but that's hardly a problem for a politician... they do such things seven times before breakfast.
Awad said, for instance, that the measure could preclude the courts from enforcing or executing his will, since it includes references to Islamic law.
Update from a recent post: Newly elected mayor of Tower Hamlets in England, Luftur Rahman, opines that Islam is incompatible with democracy ... QED
OK, I am pretty sure there are not that many Muslims in Oklahoma, so who are the idiots who make up that 30 percent.
If this mans will include references to Islamic Law he should get a new lawyer and sue his old one for male practice.
Such references would be easy pickings for a sharp lawyer contesting the will to have it broken in the courts.
Ground temperature is the cure!
No surprise here. Federal judges make all the important laws these days. When will we stop enforcing them?
Send her a copy of Marbury v. Madison and order her to submit in writing what part of John Marshalls’ opinion does she not understand? Judges are administered an Oath or affirm to defend the US Constitution. The men who wrote and ratified that Supreme Law of the land intended the US Constitution
Not sharia Law,nor any foreign system to have precedence over our US Constitution. IF the Judge goes further she will have
overreached like that judge in Riverside on DADT repeal—and will have violated her solemn Oath -and ought not be retained-but IMPEACHED.
Once upon a time in America I thought it unreasonable for a judge to redefine “marriage” but look at the mess created when
Mass. did just that. The Constitutional amendment is the last resort to reign in activist Judges short of open rebellion.
IMO we need to reassert the founding idea that the Judiciary is by design intended to be the weakest branch -wholly dependent upon the Executive and Legislative as the Constitutional check on a despotic branch.I would consider Impeachment.
because Islam is not compatible with our system of government a democratic republic of laws applied equally to all. And
because Islam and the Christians and Jews have been at war since their mad prophet crawled form his cave. And because since the Shah of Iran was overthrown in th elate decade of the 1970’s there has been an ever increasing expansion of
Islam -have we forgotten 9-11-01—or the Ft.Hood Jihad by
one trusted by the US Army as an Officer? Nearly forty incidents recorded in partial list of Islamic terror world wide in th elast two months on website www.religionofpeace.com
As I understand this law and the use thereof, it would be limited to state courts only. Therefore, the judge has ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to interfere. OK should send a local sheriff and arrest her for obstruction of justice.
No right to interfere, assuming that we still have voting rights and the states are not agents of the federal government. Given that judges have routinely overturned the will of the voters, the ballot box is as endeangered as a RINO at CPAC.
BTW, where is ACLU and their “separation of church and state”? Crickets.
What is a judge going to do? Tell her to piss off.
I know Muslims don’t want to assimilate with the west. They come to divide and conquer. You didn’nt answer my question.
In order for sharia law to be put up to a vote, a legislator had to sponsor it. Then voted in committee. You just don’t put crap like this on a ballot.
Crap like this on a ballot—Hmmm I heard the OK Law read on
Bill Bennetts Morning in America. — I believe it was a credible reading.which part of it do think was crap? It reflects what men like James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Joseph Story James Wilson and others have said about Constitutional
Interpretation.It is not in conflict with the rule of law as far as I can see.The Amendment merely stated what ought be obvious to all judges sworn to defend the US Constitution,
and all laws made pursuant to it.
Never mind the judge’s ruling. How did this issue (crap) get on a voting ballot in the first place?
Most probably by some lawyer acting on behalf of his clients-
writing a proposed ballot initiative under existing State Law
That is how such Ballot initiatives are usually accomplished here in Colorado.The Judiciary has been allowed to pass judgement often without regard to the US Constitution they swear to defend. And Liberals/ progressives of every stripe
love to play games with the written law applying the metaphysical refinements that Thomas Jefferson and Joseph Story wrote were not necessary and have no place in interpreting/ applying our law.I find it necessary and not crap at all.