Federal judge blocks SQ 755

I realize a lot of you who read Political Realities every day do not live in my area of the country and consequently, you may not be as interested in some of the goings on in Oklahoma. Most of my posts deal with national issues, but with the recent elections and the importance of the results in our state, I have been spending quite a bit of time on state issues. Such is the case with the state questions we recently considered in Oklahoma, specifically State Question 755. For what it’s worth, I think this will be a case that sets precedent for years to come. As you know, SQ 755 will amend our state’s Constitution, making it a requirement for judges in our state to consider only state and federal law when deciding a case. It specifically bans the consideration of international law and Islamic or Sharia Law. Read here why I think Sharia Law should be banned. This measure passed with a 70% majority of the votes, which gives a pretty clear indication of the will of the people of Oklahoma.

The ballots had scarcely been counted when a lawsuit was filed in federal court, attempting to prevent the certification of the results by Oklahoma’s State Election Board. It was learned yesterday that a temporary restraining order has been issued by U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange. This injunction prevents the election results from being certified by the State Election Board until November 22, when a hearing on a preliminary injunction is scheduled. From The Oklahoman, here is part of why Muneer Awad says he filed the lawsuit.

U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange handed down the order after an Oklahoma man filed a lawsuit claiming the amendment stigmatized his religion and would invalidate his will, which he said is partially based on Islamic Law, also known as Sharia Law.

“My constitutional rights are being violated through the condemnation of my faith,” said Muneer Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma. “Islam was the target of this amendment. This amendment does not have a secular purpose.”

Maybe I am way off base here, but I fail to see how Awad’s constitutional rights would be violated by SQ 755. It does nothing to keep him from practicing his religion, but it will prevent his religious law from being shoved down the throats of Americans. The people who voted for this measure, of which I am one, did not intend to stigmatize Islam. (Honestly, there is no need to do that, as Muslims themselves have done a fair job of that already. Actions really do speak louder than words.) All we intended was to prevent what has happened in Great Britain from happening in our state. That’s all, nothing more, nothing less.

As this lawsuit proceeds, the public relations campaign has already started. The Oklahoman is reporting Muneer Awad is claiming there is an ongoing backlash against the Muslim community in Oklahoma, starting before SQ 755 passed on November 2.

Hate mail was sent to mosques across the state before and after voters passed a measure prohibiting Oklahoma courts from considering Sharia law when making decisions.
Muneer Awad, executive director of the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said Monday that one of the mailed items included a DVD with hate speech and pictures of guns. Awad said the DVD was given to the FBI for further review.
“We have seen a steady increase of hate in our places of worship,” Awad said.
Awad said much of the mail is vulgar and espouses violence. He considers it a backlash against the Muslim community that began before the Nov. 2 election. Awad said he believes the campaign for the amendment contributed to the anti-Muslim sentiment.
“They implied that we’re trying to change life in Oklahoma,” he said.

First of all, I would like to see examples of the hate mail Awad says CAIR has been receiving. I have no doubt some of it was very plain in their opposition to Islam, but that doesn’t necessarily constitute hate speech. I am not fond of people expressing their opinions in a vulgar manner, using curse words and the like, but I have learned that it doesn’t pay to have such a thin skin, as it usually gets a person nowhere fast.
As we await the final outcome on SQ 755, I want to include a quote from Michael Clements, of Reporter 37.

As this is being worked out in the courts our state leaders should review the language of the question so that it can be reintroduced if necessary in the future. The simple fact is this is not an attempt to stigmatize any religion. It is a move designed to maintain the integrity of our court system by keeping the influence of religion and foreign laws out.

I can’t say I know for sure what the final outcome on SQ 755 will be, but I will not be surprised to see a ruling in favor of CAIR, striking down the measure. I understand our judicial system is in place for a reason, to prevent abuses of power and to protect the rights of all Americans. However, it seems increasingly more common that when the will of the people is asserted at the ballot box, a judge comes along and strikes that will down. I think that is an abuse of power, in it’s own right.

By LD Jackson