Well first lets put this discussion in context. I believe Gingrich was talking about separate Shariah Courts for Muslims, along the lines of the Brits. Not a takeover of the courts by Muslims to administer Shariah to all of us.
Also, I was responding to Dale's comment that it could not happen.
You have taken the position that it cannot happen in America because the Constitution protects us. I do not agree with that view.
Since you profess to be knowledgeable in Con Law, I will just outline my position. First Marbury v. Madison, and its progeny make it clear that the Supreme Court has the final word regarding interpretation of the constitution.
It is also true that interpretations have changed over the years and that in times of extreme pressure the court has yielded to the hysteria of the moment, rather than followed the constitution.
We have the Dredd Scott decision, humans are property, Kilo involving 5th amendment takings for so called public use, and the KOREMATSU case involving the interment of American Citizens of Japanese Descent, to illustrate just a few.
The most recent sea change in the courts interpretation occurred during the New Deal when the court went from a Laissez Faire view of the commerce powers, which limited the power and authority of the Federal Government toward expanding the powers of the Federal Government, at least when it comes to ordinary tax paying responsible citizens and limiting many individual liberties. This trend continues to this day, although we may be in the early stages of a reversal, or at least I hope so.
Anyone reading the cases written before Roosevelt threatened to pack the court and those written immediately thereafter can see this, and it is as I assume you are aware widely acknowledged.
We now have a court that is politically divided. Indeed in many cases, if you know what Justice Kennedy will do you know which way the case will turn out. So on this court effectively one justice decides many constitutional issues. I only mention this to illustrate my point that the court determines what the Constitution means and not the words in the Constitution. For example the view of Justice Scalia is very different than say the view of Justice Ginsburg.
A first year law student could construct an argument that is at least as good as the courts opinion in Roe v. Wade.
Something like Shariah is so integral to the Muslim Religion, that it is a violation of Muslim's religious rights not to permit them to resolve their cases in Shariah Compliant courts.
There are many cases addressing issues like being required to work on religious holidays, wearing whatever the scarf that Muslim Women wear, etc. These cases swing both ways and who knows how they will ultimately resolve. While this argument sounds ridiculous to me, I am not at all sure that it would sound ridiculous to some on the court now or who may be appointed to the court in the future. I think we have seen equally ridiculous ideas adopted by the court. While a statute may not stop a court that is dead set on this result, it may serve as a deterrent.
Recently there was a news report involving Justice Stevens, I believe, and he supposedly opined that burning the Koran might not be protected speech under the first amendment. I hope that is not true, but I suspect it is.
You say it couldn't happen and I say they would never inter American Citizens in camps based on their ethnicity, if I didn't know it happened. The constitution did not protect them.
I would never believe that a government would never kill millions of its citizens for being Jewish, except it has happened.
I would never have thought that our money system would be in its current State of peril except that it has happened before in other countries.
I would never have thought that in America, the President could issue a death warrant on an American Citizen, except that it has.
Look at the trend across Europe, I see no reason why it couldn't happen here. So I disagree with Dale and such a law would not be useful and with you, that we are protected by the Constitution.
Lastly, I replied to you post hours ago and for some reason it is gone and I had to re write it. Does anyone know how that could happen. Did I press the wrong button something.
lj |
