Questions for the First Muslim Federal Judicial Nominee

The following post is from the Sharia TipSheet, as reposted at the United West.

Questions for the First Muslim Federal Judicial Nominee

The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing for the first Muslim federal judicial nominee is set for Wednesday April 28th. Zahid Quraishi, if confirmed, would become a federal judge for the U.S. District of New Jersey.

Given the numerous ways Islamic doctrine conflicts with the U.S. Constitution, Quraishi should be asked the following questions (which have been provided to the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee) at the hearing:

It has been reported you are a Muslim. While there is no religious test for federal office, the Senate and the American people are entitled to know whether your religious beliefs are compatible or incompatible with U.S. law — the law which, if you are confirmed, you will be asked to swear to uphold. As a preliminary question, do you as a Muslim affirm and adhere to Islamic doctrine from the Quran, hadith, and other authoritative Islamic sources?

Islamic doctrine holds that sharia law should be the supreme law of the land throughout the entire world. It further holds that sharia law is divine in origin and thus superior to any human-made law, including the U.S. Constitution. If confirmed, you will be asked to swear an oath you will uphold the U.S. Constitution, which by virtue of its Article VI, is the supreme law of the land. Do you renounce the portions of Islamic doctrine calling for the supremacy of sharia law and the subjugation of all human-made law to sharia law?

Islamic doctrine holds that jihad is the means by which the supremacy of sharia law is to be achieved. Do you renounce the portions of Islamic doctrine calling for jihad to achieve sharia supremacy?

What role, if any, should sharia law play in federal cases? In family law?

Will you go on record now and state that our First Amendment right to freedom of speech gives the right to anyone in the United States to criticize or disagree with your prophet Muhammad, and will you also go on record now and state that you support and defend anyone’s right to criticize or disagree with your prophet Muhammad, and that you condemn anyone who threatens death or physical harm to another person who is exercising that right?

Our First Amendment guarantees freedom of religion in the United States. As part of that freedom, anyone in the United States has the right to join or leave any religion, or have no religion at all. Will you go on record now and state that you support and defend the idea that in the United States a Muslim has not only the freedom to leave Islam, but to do so without fear of physical harm, and will you also go on record now and state that you condemn anyone who threatens physical harm to a Muslim who is exercising that freedom?

According to the words of Allah found in Quran 5:38 and the teachings of your prophet Muhammad, amputation of a hand is an acceptable punishment for theft. But our U.S. Constitution, which consists of man-made laws, has the Eighth Amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment such as this. Do you agree with Allah and your prophet Muhammad that amputation of a hand is an acceptable punishment for theft in the United States, or do you believe that our man-made laws prohibiting such punishments are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th Century command of Allah and teaching of Muhammad?

According to the words of Allah found in Quran 4:3, Muslim men are allowed, but not required, to be married to up to four wives. Being married to more than one wife in the United States is illegal according to our man-made bigamy laws. Do you agree with Allah that it is legal for a Muslim man in the United States to be married to more than one woman, or do you believe that our man-made laws prohibiting bigamy are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th Century command of Allah?

Do you affirm or renounce the following from Islamic sources and scholars:

  • “the worst of all the moving creatures, in the sight of Allah, are those who reject Faith and do not believe” (Quran verse 8:55)?
  • the testimony of a woman is worth half that of a man’s in court (various sources collected here)?
  • the non-recognition of marital rape?

If confirmed, would you enforce U.S. antiterrorism laws against your fellow Muslims accused of violating those laws (e.g., providing material support for terrorism — 18 U.S. Code § 2339B)?

Are you a member of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA)?

Do you agree with AMJA that

  • Muslims should not work in American law enforcement?
  • Muslims should not be “pleased with a legal system that does not come from Allah”?
  • Muslims should seek justice in Islamic courts, not secular courts?

23 thoughts on “Questions for the First Muslim Federal Judicial Nominee

  1. There is not one person in all of Congress, man or women or the judicial committee who has the balls to ask these questions. He will be asked none of them and will then promptly be confirmed.

    And he won’t be the last. Sharia law will eventually come to the American justice system.

    • No, It won’t! There are too many Americans who will NEVER EVER accept islamic anything to our laws! Period! Or let there be WAR!

      • in my city we have a big fat muslim council woman named ZULFAT Suara. A real muslim ho.

        • first answer the muslim will give is:
          you quote a wrong translation of the Quran
          and second, it is untranslatable
          so it is a miracle that even illiterates know the scripture by heart, while it is written in 8 th century aramaic. This proves the power of allah.

  2. It doesn’t bloody matter what you ask this GD muslim, they are allowed to lie to us infidels because their bloody koran says they can. Allowing these bloody 3rd world savages any inroads to our legal system is a recipe for disaster.

    • “It doesn’t bloody matter”

      I understand your concerns, but I don’t think it’s quite true that it doesn’t matter what he answers. If he hedges his answer, this may prove a wake-up call for Westerners. If he publicly puts Western law above Sharia, this is also important. Public announcements are much more important in Middle Eastern cultures than private assurances. It will embolden those Muslim immigrants, or their children, who have had enough of Sharia. And if extremist Muslims try to kill the judge as an apostate, well, that will also serve as a wake-up call. It seems to me better than doing nothing, though perhaps only marginally better.

  3. The orthodoxy of Islam and Islamic law, is the greatest threat in the world’s history ever to humanity, love, peace, justice and fairness, humanity’s fundamentally most vicious cult gang in history, can not support American principles, nor especially it’s legal system, 100%, literally ever!!! In truth, it is not actually compatible with about any existing form of government, either, but mostly American enshrined principles of Freedom, under God, which is also (GOD AND G_D) 100% incompatible with any of Islam!! They as every regular here knows, are likewise 100% incompatible and not the same, whatsoever! That pretty much should lay out the basics here, on the subject of a judge. You don’t actually swear the oath of office to an actual God in Islam!!!

    Only one can survive, so totally incompatible are the two. Notable intelligent, learned scholarly people, especially such as leaders in all history know these facts intimately, either from watching Islamics, like Churchill, or studying Islam. I speak of the pious, the orthodox, the fundamentalists, not the usually, but not always typical not well studied so called practicing Muslim, who know little of the actual horrors of the orthodox Muslim. Ask deceased journalists Nick Berg, or Danny Pearl, viciously butchered alive, or countless others, men and women, recently and through all history of 1400 years. Ask St. Pius V about the Battle of Lepanto 1571, or Martel at Tours, 732, or Sobieski at Vienna 1683, they well knew and succeeded in their battles, magnificently, as massive heroes for humanity.

    Under no circumstance is such a person compatible with American justice systems, imperfect as they are, compared to every other system, still better, than any other yet known.

  4. Someone ought to do something. Cough. Who will ask these questions at the time and place they matter? Who are the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is there anyone we can deem likely to stand up, and/or who can be approached with the above proposal if they’re not known to already express themselves in this vein? Does the public have any say in this, or is there any democratic or even judicial process to influence the committee’s decisions?

    In case he and future followers get through, how likely is it the Supreme Court will strike down stealthy or overt Shariah rulings, who will bring relevant cases to its attention (systematically), and what is the process for removing judges who are found to act against their oath? Subverting a state with the intent of installing a different belief system is treason, will they be treated accordingly?

    We are already ahead in this development throughout much of Europe. Don’t screw this up…

  5. He’ll say yes, and you’ll know he Lied, but will be confirmed nonetheless.

      • 100% correct, A RELIGION DOES NOT RULE BY DICTATION (leads, models, exemplifies, sets principles, laws as guides, for later judging), BASED ON FEAR (loves, praises, actual, real mercies), OF THE PRIMARY BASIC SOLUTION TO ALL PROHIBITIONS (sins), BY (any believing cult gang member muslim men) VISCIOUS, BRUTAL DEATH (GOD, JESUS, is the judge, men not to judge), AS THE CURE, AS IS SO WITH THE CULT GANG ISLAM! Worse, all knowing infinite loving GOD not so stupid to state gestate women to 6 months incorrectly, flat earth incorrectly, sun sets in pool, etc. All knowing God did not need two opposing books, just one, with complementary sections, as initial covenant, and two, as second covenant, with HIS peoples. Much more than this simple flawed condensed comparative. I know God, I serve God, but am certainly not HE. Moreover, doubting Thomas groups, historical, archaeological, and astronomical, mathematical records support dating Jesus life and times and places, and even resurrection, massively, but one must seek, and accurately it is now available, through internet data and lectures. Not so, even closely, for pretenders to Christianity!

  6. 90 years ago Democrats were appointing KKK members and leaders into position of power without questioning their ethics or motives now they are electing and appointing Moslems without questioning their ethics or motives.

  7. Joe Biden is old enough to have had fellow Democratic friends who were KKK boosters and supporters ,I guess now he is going to make “friendly” with Jihad boosters and supports ?

  8. What more is there to say, than what has been said by the previous posters here? dhimmicrat party of collaborators, sympathizers, traitors, and fellow travelers. Just who are the extremists? dhimmicrats or kufr?

  9. 20 years ago America began in earnest to evict the God of the Bible from the public square. Now, 20 years later, they are welcoming another god who is more to their liking. They have been warned but they are insisting upon their choice. Could Yah and His Word be so repulsive that they would welcome a god who lies to them and allows them to lie to others? Apparently so, sniff! I miss the country that I grew up in.:=(

  10. If he, of others like him are ever confirmed, it will be the beginning of the end of your justice system and of the Constitution.

  11. “Islamic doctrine holds that sharia law should be the supreme law of the land throughout the entire world.”

    In that case the great majority of Muslim countries are in contravention of Islamic doctrine. Perhaps the author is unaware of how little sharia is encoded in the legal systems of Muslim countries apart from Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan and a few others:

    That being the case, the judge in question will likely have no more qualms about swearing to uphold the law in the US than judges have in many Muslim countries. Nevertheless it would not hurt to keep an eye on his rulings for signs of bias, although over the last 20 years or so there has been no shortage of pro-Islamic bias from non-Muslim judges who have an unduly benign view of Islam and an unrealistic estimation of their own understanding of it.

  12. For those wishing to learn the evil fundamentals of Islam, the actual truth of Islam, or who might question or doubt my words, here is a professional discussion revelation of the current reality with two of the finest professional experts on Islam, Robt. Spencer a Persian, and Bill Warner a Ph. D. from American also. A rare and superb top level discussion of the 1400 year problem based on a single man, This is a pretty big deal, this interview-discussion of Islam and muslims. Here:

Comments are closed.