Justice for All: American Muslims, Sharia Law, and Maintaining Comity within American Jurisprudence

By Fallon, Sarah M. | Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, Winter 2013 | Go to article overview

Justice for All: American Muslims, Sharia Law, and Maintaining Comity within American Jurisprudence


Fallon, Sarah M., Boston College International and Comparative Law Review


Abstract: The U.S. Muslim population, although currently only comprising one percent of all Americans, is on the rise. Muslim Americans are largely assimilated, happy with their lives, moderate with respect to divisive issues, and opposed to violence. Nonetheless, in recent years, a growing misunderstanding and fear of Muslims has led some activists to seek to ban the application of Islamic law, or Sharia, in American courts, despite the lack of evidence of an increase in the use of Sharia in U.S. courts. These attempted bans have seen varying degrees of success. This Note argues that these bans violate the voluntary, but longstanding, principle of comity and are unnecessary. When properly applied, comity prevents Sharia from pre-empting the Constitution while encouraging mutual acceptance and understanding between Muslim and non-Muslim Americans.

[M]any [American Muslims] live in a psychological ghetto caused by the lack of acceptance they feel from their neighbors and colleagues, especially in the post-Sept. 11 era. This psychological ghetto may prove the largest challenge in the war on terrorism.

-Salam Al-Marayati1

Introduction

In November 2010, Oklahoma voters overwhelmingly approved an amendment to the state constitution that would prevent state judges from considering Islamic law-known as Sharia-or other international law in their decisions.2 A federal district court granted a preliminary injunction barring the State Board of Elections from certifying the elec- tion results and implementing the amendment.3 On review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld the injunction, thereby preventing the amendment from taking effect.4 Although initially more successful than most, Oklahoma was not the first state to seriously con- sider such a ban.5

Initiatives like Oklahoma's arise from misconceptions about Sharia and its application in the United States, as well as widespread Judeo- Christian wariness of Muslims, both within and outside the United States.6 A number of factors have led to this pervasive fear and distrust of Muslims and Islamic law, including military conflicts (particularly those regarding oil), sour diplomatic relations with several predomi- nandy Muslim countries, and a misunderstanding of differences be- tween belief structures.7 Although Muslims make up less than one per- cent of the U.S. population, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 led some Americans to associate Muslims and Islamic law with terror- ism, encouraging many non-Muslims to fear the unknown.8

Although many Americans have reacted to this fear of Muslims by shunning them, such a response is likely to exacerbate tensions; at worst, it could lead to a greater level of Muslim extremism.9 Shunning any group tends to create a feeling within that group of exclusion from the broader society.10 The more excluded a group feels, the more likely some members are to tend toward extremist views.11 Therefore, an in- clusive approach should lead to greater mutual understanding and serve to reduce tensions with the Muslim community domestically and abroad.12

Reversing the trend of attempting to ban the consideration of Sha- ria in American courts would be a strong step in the direction of elimi- nating anti-Muslim bias.13 Attempts to ban Sharia likely violate the U.S. Constitution and are particularly offensive in light of the absence of parallel bans on the consideration of other religious codes in American courts.14 Moreover, Sharia bans violate the voluntary but long-standing principle of comity, which encourages courts to defer to foreign laws where such laws do not prejudice the power or rights of the U.S. gov- ernment or its citizens.15

This Note focuses on this violation of comity and its implications. Part I discusses the history of Muslims in the United States and explains Sharia's origins. Additionally, it describes the basis for anti-Muslim and anti-Sharia sentiments and oudines the most successful attempts to ban Sharia to date. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Justice for All: American Muslims, Sharia Law, and Maintaining Comity within American Jurisprudence
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.