American Laws for American Courts

American Thinker ^ | 18 Sept 11 | Christopher Holton

[LSUfan]

"The Courts provided for in subsection A of this section, when exercising their judicial authority, shall uphold and adhere to the law as provided in the United States Constitution, the Oklahoma Constitution, the United States Code, federal regulations promulgated pursuant thereto, established common law, the Oklahoma statutes and rules promulgated pursuant thereto, and if necessary the law of another state of the United States provided the law of the other state does not include Sharia law, in making judicial decisions. 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. The provisions of this subsection shall apply to all cases before the respective courts including, but not limited to, cases of first impression."

[WayneS]

I though this ground had already been covered by Article VI of the U.S. Constitution:

--------------------------------------------------------

Article VI

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affi rmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

[Adder]

Yeah,,,apparently some on the SCOTUS feel free to examine foreign laws in making their decisions if they can’t twist the Constitution to say what they want it to say. See Sandra Day O’Connor’s comments, et al.

[WayneS]

I don't know about you, but I do not consider such "behaviour" in a judge to be "good"...

-------------------------------------------

Article III
SECTION 1

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

----------------------------------

;-)

[Lurking Libertarian]

There are many times a U.S. court should apply foreign laws. Two obvious examples:

1. A U.S. company buys goods from a foreign supplier. The contract says that it is governed by the laws of the foreign country. A lawsuit, even in a U.S. court, must apply the law selected in the contract.

2. A U.S. citizen on vacation in a foreign country is involved in a traffic accident. The victim sues the U.S. defendant in a U.S. court. The lawsuit is governed by the laws of the place where the accident happened.

I agree that there is no place for U.S. courts to apply Sharia law to any domestic transaction, but this law as written is vastly overbroad.