Oct 26, 2011
Print This Post
A Florida appeals court has ruled that Islamic law can be used to decide a civil case between a mosque and its former trustees, leading one legal advocacy group to call it an “extremely dangerous” decision.
The state’s 2nd District Court of Appeal on Friday denied without comment a petition filed by the mosque, known as the Islamic Education Center of Tampa, which is challenging Hillsborough Circuit Judge Richard Nielsen’s ruling in March that he intended to cite “ecclesiastical Islamic law” in the case, the St. Petersburg Times reported.
The former trustees have been suing the mosque because they claim they were unfairly removed as trustees. Nielsen said in March that based on testimony, “under ecclesiastical law” and pursuant to the Koran, “Islamic brothers should attempt to resolve a dispute among themselves.”
The two parties reportedly agreed ahead of time to use an imam and Islamic Law to resolve any potential differences through arbitration. So Nielsen only referenced Islamic law in deciding whether the two parties could resolve their differences through arbitration. He ruled they could.
The arbitrator ruled in favor of the former trustees, an outcome that would give them control of $2.2 million in mosque funds if the decision is upheld, the newspaper reported.
David French, an attorney for the American Center for Law and Justice, told Fox News the appellate court’s decision is “an extremely dangerous development.”
“American courts should not be in the business of interpreting Islamic law – period,” French said. “We don’t want American courts applying foreign law.”
But an attorney with the Council on American Islamic Relations disputed that assertion.
“This is not Sharia law,” said Gadeir Abbas, a staff attorney with CAIR. “The judge can refer to religious doctrine – like Islamic law or Jewish law, but the judge cannot take positions on religious doctrine.”
Abbas told Fox News that the case involving the Islamic education center was about a contract agreement.
“This is freedom of contract – which is a conservative value,” he said. “The notion that this is some gross deviation from constitutional standards is fear-mongering.”
But French said it’s a case of “creeping Sharia.”
“This is exactly how these things happen,” French said. “An innocuous dispute between two parties seeking to apply religious principles and laws outside the American tradition – that’s when you begin to see these things creep into the system.”
French argued that the case could have a far-reaching impact on the legal system.
“The concern here is simple – even small cases can lead to the development of precedent,” French told Fox News. “While this dispute may be relatively obscure, the legal principles that come from the dispute could matter a great deal.”
FOX News Talk
Not sure how I feel about this, but will the courts allow Catholic Cannon Law to factor decisions? I say no and believe the same reasons apply and they would apply as far as I am concerned if it were Hebrew, Hindu or laws other than tort laws of the U.S.
America is founded under Christian beliefs. But through many years we all turned away because of certain groups. If you believe in God you need to resist the so called Islam and Sharia there evil.
America is founded under Christian beliefs. But through many years we all turned away because of certain groups. If you believe in God you need to resist the so called Islam and Sharia there evil.
This is exactly the reason why islamist should live in their own country, take care of their own laws, and stay out of our country. How many of us would go live in their country under their evil laws? Those who are here came to get away from the exact things they are perpetrating within our country – Honor Killings? Really – and Abbas is my sister – this is not good people.
Relax, people, this is not the first step on a slippery slope towards Islamic domination. Without seeing the contract itself, one must assume, based on available information, that the parties knowingly and voluntarily made the informed decision to choose what laws could be factored into an arbitration. It is not unusual for parties to stipulate to a cjoice of law as part of a dispute resolution clause in a contract, though, typically, the designation is for a particular state's law, not a particular religion. You are in no danger of losing your rights or being over run by Islamic law in our courts.
With all due respect Rich, these are American courts, not a court in a foreign country. Unfortunately, there is a lot going on behind the scenes in this country that a lot of people are not aware of…we need to pray for America if we want to keep here ours…
It seems to me that when in America everyone should abide.
"The two parties reportedly agreed ahead of time to use an imam and Islamic Law to resolve any potential differences through arbitration". Sounds like the Judge agreed.
Since the parties contracted to use a religious setting, to resolve any future conflict in their agreement, they could do so.
Kind of a bland, non confrontational, non decision, that the contract means what it says. Judge Nielsen merely affirmed American contract law. But also the Judge threw them out of court, in essence saying; "Your contract says arbitration by imom, so get out of my court and go to an imom." Fair enough. I see no creeping Sharia.
If you contract to use an imom for disputes, you waive US UCC contract law, and will be thrown out of US courts, that's the precedent.
I would point out, that once one of the parties went into an American court with a contract dispute, they waived their rights to a strictly religious, Sharia settlement. The Judge wisely decided to honor the contract conditions-precedent, choice of dispute resolution.
New book at 200yearsofcentralbanks.com.
could this lawsuit be a ruse, to start a precedent, which liberal lawyers will use to force sharia law onto us, just a thought.
I really can't say that I agree with French's statement. I am a proud Christian myself and am completely opposed to any kind of Islamic tradition being integrated into the court system. But that is not the case here. There had not been a Legislative decision made. The judge basically just suggested that if they could handle this without using the court system, then he would allow it. From what I understand, a group had already made it clear to the judge that this decision could be taken care using Islamic tradition:"The two parties reportedly agreed ahead of time to use an imam and Islamic Law to resolve any potential differences through arbitration."The judge at the time was probably asking himself what the point was of having this brought into the court system when both parties agreed that they would settle their differences by using their particular religious traditions(outside the court system I am assuming). This case should have never even made it to the court system to begin with. This whole dispute, I believe, was just based on ignorance and the two parties not knowing how the court system works.
If you don't like our laws why not go back where you came from and let them stone you.
This is just the beginning…..
The nation of islam has gained a strong foothold.I find it unbelievable each day I see another example of America bowing down to muslims, the majority of americans seem to be blind to what waits around the corner.The courts bow to islam, the schools bow to islam and the goverment now led by an islamist certainly bows to islam. My anger lies mostly with americans who sit idle and let foriegners and illegals to rewrite our laws.
Yeap! they sure are trying this "666" law in our country and why the Gov. is backing them up is the? This is America, not an Islamic country! And, it is not in our constitution to begin with. These people are aiming to make America one world gov., and they do not care where the damage will go, as long they want to meet their goal. Pls. go to "Endtime web site" and learn more about what our Gov. is trying to do. This is not God's (The Almighty One) words, period!
THE GOV. IS TRYING SO HARD TO ERASE OUR USA CONSTITUTION, GUYS. LOOK EVERYWHERE AROUND US, IT IS VERY VERY OBVIOUS. WE, NEED TO WAKE UP AT THIS SEC. AND TAKE ACTIONS OF WHAT IS GOING ON!