The following report was posted earlier this month by Sharia TipSheet.

Muslim Judicial Nominee Won’t Answer Questions About Sharia Supremacy and Jihad

The Sharia TipSheet sent questions about sharia supremacy and jihad to Adeel Mangi, the first Muslim to be nominated for a seat on the federal appellate bench. The questions asked about the nominee’s personal beliefs on these matters and other incompatibilities between the U.S. Constitution and sharia law.

The questions were made more urgent by recent revelations the nominee sits on the board of the Alliance of Families for Justice, a left-wing group founded by a domestic terrorist which has campaigned for the release from prison of a half-dozen black nationalists convicted of killing police officers. The nominee has thus given the appearance by virtue of his board membership of condoning violence, which begs the question: Does he also condone jihad violence as a means of achieving Muslim world domination?

The questions were sent in early December to Mangi’s workplace, but there was no response. The TipSheet raised similar issues with regard to the three previous Muslim federal judicial nominees, but no public official — Democrat or Republican — has had the courage to put such questions to the nominees at their confirmation hearings or in questions for the record. Moreover, Mangi was not asked these questions at his confirmation hearing earlier this month, making him possibly the fourth Muslim to skate to the federal bench without the American public knowing whether he personally believes sharia law or the U.S. Constitution is the law of the land.

The TipSheet’s query letter and question set follow:

Questions for Judicial Nominee

To: Adeel Mangi

I publish the Sharia TipSheet at Liberato.US.

You are the fourth Muslim nominated for a federal judgeship.

The American people are entitled to know whether your personal beliefs would prevent you from honoring the oath of office which requires federal judges to perform all duties incumbent upon them under the Constitution and the laws of the United States.

Please answer the questions below. Your responses will be published verbatim in the Sharia TipSheet.

Questions for the Nominee

Given the numerous ways Islamic doctrine conflicts with the U.S. Constitution, the nominee should be asked the following questions:

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 personal beliefs are compatible or incompatible with U.S. law — 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?

Should marital agreements made in accordance with sharia law in other countries be enforced in U.S. family courts?

Will you go on record now and state that our 1st 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 1st 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 8th 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 nonrecognition 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?