Southern Poverty Law Center on Shariah in American Courts: Move On, Nothing To See Here

[Geee]

Big Peace:

A recent study entitled Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases, released by The Center for Security Policy, identifies dozens of American court cases involving sharia law. Many of these cases involve blatant violations of Constitutional rights, usually to the detriment of women and children, including the enforcement of foreign custody orders to wrest children from their mothers. Yet, despite the numerous cases cited in the study, several commentators have chosen to selectively criticize the study, rather than recognize the challenges presented to the American justice system by litigants advocating for the application of sharia as detailed in the study.

Ed Brayton, a contributor at scienceblog.com, recently accused the Center’s study of being “fraudulent” because in some of the fifty cases cited in the study the courts did not ultimately apply or enforce sharia law. After describing a handful of such cases he argued that the study proved that sharia was not a threat.

He reaches this conclusion by completely ignoring the many cited cases wherein sharia was applied, and completely discounting important trial court decisions applying sharia that were later reversed. The first decision he describes is the Michigan case Tariconda v. Pinjari in which the trial court enforced, through the judicial doctrine of comity, a talaq divorce decree from India. Under sharia a talaq divorce may be committed by the husband by just pronouncing three times that he divorces the wife. Although the appellate court later reversed the trial court, holding that the Indian divorce decree should not be granted comity because the instant divorce did not involve “the basic rudiments of due process” and sharia principles of division of property discriminated against wives, the trial judge nonetheless had held the talaq divorce enforceable in Michigan causing the wife to incur the expense and uncertainty of appeal.

Brayton also cites the Arizona case Nationwide Resources Corporation v. Massabni, addressed by the study, in which the appellate court found that different laws apply to Christians than Muslims in Syria, and as the parties were Christian, the appellate court did not apply sharia. However, the appellate court found that litigant Nationwide did contend that sharia applied, and the trial court had applied sharia. Thus, the litigant had argued for the application of sharia, and the trial court had acceded. Brayton additionally cites the California case Karson v. Soleimani, in which the trial court dismissed a case, under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, holding that the nation of Iran was a more appropriate forum, although the appellate court reversed finding that “Iran may well lack an independent judiciary that adheres to principles of due process.”

Robert Steinback of The Southern Poverty Law Center has recycled the contentions of Brayton in a recent post, and admits to being satisfied that numerous, admittedly “erroneous,” trial court decisions have been reversed on appeal.

[NCTexan]

The Southern Poverty Law Center is a pit of leftist vipers. They were big players in the Pigford scandal.

[Chickadee]

 

Anyone interested in applying?

 

Teaching Tolerance Needs Dedicated Educators

Submitted by Michelle Garcia on June 20, 2011

 

* Category:

* Teaching Tolerance News

 

Teaching Tolerance is looking for 20 outstanding multicultural educators to serve on our new Teacher Advisory Board. Board members' duties will include giving advice on classroom activities as well as providing input on professional development materials and content for Teaching Tolerance magazine.

 

Serving on the board is both an honor and a commitment. Board member must be willing to evaluate story ideas and lessons, comment on published articles and review projects in development. The advisory board meets once a year in Montgomery, Ala. (with travel expenses paid for). The first meeting is scheduled for January 2012. Otherwise, board members will be in touch with staff members as needed. Time commitments will vary, but generally they should not exceed more than 15 hours a quarter.

 

Each person chosen to the board will be appointed for one year. Classroom teachers, resource specialists, librarians, school counselors and site administrators are all encouraged to apply. You will be asked to provide information about your experience, credentials and the strengths you bring to the position.

 

The deadline for applications is 9 a.m. (Central Time) on Tuesday, June 28. Email any questions to editor@teachingtolerance.org. Please put "Teacher Advisory Board" in the subject line.

 

Garcia is the professional development manager of Teaching Tolerance.