Only American law should be used in American courts. Foreign law — especially foreign law that violates the U.S. Constitution, federal law, or state law — should not be considered when adjudicating cases under American jurisprudence.
This is a no-brainer. It shouldn’t be controversial, but it is.
It wasn’t significant until the specter of Shariah loomed over the judicial system of the United States. Then it became “discriminatory”, an “infringement on religious freedom under the First Amendment”, and — dare we say it? — “racism”.
A couple of days ago Kansas became the latest state whose legislature has officially affirmed “American Law for American Courts”. In the following video, David Yerushalmi, the General Counsel for the Center for Security Policy, discusses the issue with Ezra Levant.
Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this clip:
Below is an excerpt from American Law for American Courts (ALAC) explaining the rationale for the Kansas legislation, and other state legislation following the same model:
Unfortunately, increasingly, foreign laws and legal doctrines, including Shariah law principles, are finding their way into US court cases.
Reviews of state laws provide extensive evidence that foreign laws and legal doctrines are introduced into US state court cases, including, notably, Islamic law known as Shariah, which is used in family courts and other courts in dozens of foreign Muslim-majority nations .
These foreign laws, frequently at odds with U.S. constitutional principles of equal protection and due process, typically enter the American court system through:
- Comity (mutual respect of each country’s legal system)
- Choice of law issues and
- Choice of forum or venue
Granting comity to a foreign judgment is a matter of state law, and most state and federal courts will grant comity unless the recognition of the foreign judgment would violate some important public policy of the state. This doctrine, the “Void as against Public Policy Rule,” has a long and pedigreed history.
Unfortunately, because state legislatures have generally not been explicit about what their public policy is relative to foreign laws, including as an example, Shariah, the courts and the parties litigating in those courts are left to their own devices – first to know what Shariah is, and second, to understand that granting comity to a Shariah judgment may be at odds with our state and federal constitutional principles in the specific matters at issue.
The goal of the American Laws for American Courts Act is a clear and unequivocal application of what should be the goal of all state courts: No U.S. citizen or resident should be denied the liberties, rights, and privileges guaranteed in our constitutional republic. American Laws for American Courts is needed especially to protect women and children, identified by international human rights organizations as the primary victims of discriminatory foreign laws.
By promoting American Laws for American Courts, we are preserving individual liberties and freedoms which become eroded by the encroachment of foreign laws and foreign legal doctrines, such as Shariah.
None of this should be an issue. It’s only common sense. Unfortunately, we live in a time in which common sense has been suspended, suppressed, distorted, and destroyed by political correctness.
American Laws for American Courts. What could be simpler?