Again, from the Public Policy Alliance.
…
The purpose of American Laws for American Courts is to preserve the sovereignty of the US and the 50 states and their respective Constitutions by preventing the encroachment of foreign laws and legal systems, such as Shariah law, that run counter to our individual constitutional liberties and freedoms.
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.
It is imperative that we safeguard our constitutions’ fundamentals, particularly the individual guarantees in the Bill of Rights, the sovereignty of our Nation and its people, and the principles of the rule of law—American laws, not foreign laws.
MODEL LEGISLATION
AN ACT to protect rights and privileges granted under the United States or [State] Constitution.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE [GENERAL ASSEMBLY/LEGISLATURE] OF THE STATE OF [_____]:
The [general assembly/state legislature] fully recognizes the right to contract freely under the laws of this state, and also recognizes that this right may be reasonably and rationally circumscribed pursuant to the state’s interest to protect and promote rights and privileges granted under the United States or [State] Constitution.
[1] As used in this act, “foreign law, legal code, or system” means any law, legal code, or system of a jurisdiction outside of any state or territory of the United States, including, but not limited to, international organizations and tribunals, and applied by that jurisdiction’s courts, administrative bodies, or other formal or informal tribunals.
[2] Any court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency ruling or decision shall violate the public policy of this State and be void and unenforceable if the court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency bases its rulings or decisions in in the matter at issue in whole or in part on any law, legal code or system that would not grant the parties affected by the ruling or decision the same fundamental liberties, rights, and privileges granted under the U.S. and [State] Constitutions.
[3] A contract or contractual provision (if capable of segregation) which provides for the choice of a law, legal code or system to govern some or all of the disputes between the parties adjudicated by a court of law or by an arbitration panel arising from the contract mutually agreed upon shall violate the public policy of this State and be void and unenforceable if the law, legal code or system chosen includes or incorporates any substantive or procedural law, as applied to the dispute at issue, that would not grant the parties the same fundamental liberties, rights, and privileges granted under the U.S. and [State] Constitutions.
[4]
- A. A contract or contractual provision (if capable of segregation) which provides for a jurisdiction for purposes of granting the courts or arbitration panels in personam jurisdiction over the parties to adjudicate any disputes between parties arising from the contract mutually agreed upon shall violate the public policy of this State and be void and unenforceable if the jurisdiction chosen includes any law, legal code or system, as applied to the dispute at issue, that would not grant the parties the same fundamental liberties, rights, and privileges granted under the U.S. and [State] Constitutions.
- B. If a resident of this state, subject to personal jurisdiction in this state, seeks to maintain litigation, arbitration, agency or similarly binding proceedings in this state and if the courts of this state find that granting a claim of forum non conveniens or a related claim violates or would likely violate the fundamental liberties, rights, and privileges granted under the U.S. and [State] Constitutions of the non-claimant in the foreign forum with respect to the matter in dispute, then it is the public policy of this state that the claim shall be denied.
American Laws for American Courts has passed into law in the following states:
American and Tennessee Laws for Tennessee Courts
http://state.tn.us/sos/acts/106/pub/pc0983.pdf
American and Louisiana Laws for Louisiana Courts
http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/streamdocument.asp?did=722536
Oklahoma, should it not be permitted to certify the will of its voters, should reintroduce a ban on the use of international and foreign laws using this model. One of the key factors in terror-linked CAIR’s case was the supposed singling out of Islamic sharia law. This model does not single out any particular law (or so-called religion) and therefore can not cause any specific, potential harm as such.
Send this model legislation to your elected officials.
For more on the subject, refer to Shariah vs. the Constitution: A Panel Discussion (video)
Filed under: Alerts, Creeping Sharia, Legal, Louisianna, Media, News, Politics, Religion, Sharia, Stealth Jihad, Tennessee Tagged: | Creeping Sharia, islam, law, Legal, Life, Media, Military, Muslim, News, Politics, Random, Religion, Sharia















Knowing what Oklahma was in the 1800′s, when they objected to SNAKE OIL SALESMEN and CORRUPT POLITICIANS they TARED and FEATHERED them and run them out of town on a RAIL. Looks like it is time to bring this deterant back into use and RUN THIS UGANDA JUDGE right the HELL out of TOWN.
Oklahoma and all states need to run sharia terrorism (law) “right the HELL out of TOWN.” Giving sharia an inch and they will hang the American people with it!
STOP SHARIA! Those who want sharia need to go to the country of their choice that is sharia ruled. Now if they don’t want to do that, they need to hold to our constitution and laws! And the people of OK need to protest that judge and his rulings!
yes, America!! Fight back!!!
I disagree. We should allow their law, specificly the one they like to use to dispose of unwanted wives.
They should be treated as a muslim woman, where they have to prove innocence, and a vote like any womans vote is only worth half.
We then should apply it to each and every one of them that gets out of line. We can use patriotic groups to administer this humane punishment.
After all, if you accept Sharia, you must accept all of it.
I wonder how much screaming CAIR/Muslim Brotherhood would do if we used their laws against them like they do to us?
The homosexuals would have to go back into hiding otherwise they would be put to death.
Den,
I hope you’re joking about accepting their laws.
Hoping the Oklahoma JUDICIAL DENIAL OF VOTERS WILL does not become the pattern for other states’ citizens efforts to express their will legally. Here in Minnesota it is both diametrically opposed to DIVERSITY and inappropriate to publicly discuss such topics as someone somewhere may be offended. This is cheek on my part as there are many Minnesotans who agree with this proposal. Will they stand up when the time comes?
well one could use these laws against ISLAM but so far no one has- I encourage anyone in EU to record a preacher of ISLAM , after you catch them inciting HATE to JEWS and Christians and USA and overthrow of their own nations- indict them for HATE SPEECH and incitement to harm others-
JEWs are being beat up and run out of towns , – white women are being gang raped–is that not enough hate speech proof?
CMON turnabout would be fair
However, there should be no such thing as a hate crime on the books – period. The very idea of a hate crime or hate speech goes against what our Founding Fathers intended.
Now, if they have the actual tools for violence, prosecute them away and throw them in the Atlantic/
Preserve the sanctity of our Constitution. Keep all foreign elements of legal or dogmatic away from our constitution. It is the foremost duty of every citizen to see that we are not corrupted by any alien elements of legal principles.
Well, folks, get your county in order. Then send it up the line.
SHOCKING REPORT FROM ANNE (AUSTRALIA) THAT TRUTH CANNOT BE USED AS A DEFENCE IN A CRIMINAL CASE THERE
Anne, so do I get you right?—that Muslim lawyer said to the Australian court judge that “Truth is not a defence”?
Did this happened in the Australian High Court or lower court? So who won?
The superior court ruled in favour of The Islamic Council of Victoria”? Or the two ex-Muslim pastors won? Was the case decided already? Any appeal?
Please clarify. Thanks.
———————————————————————
{ANNE, Australia, on November 29, 2010 at 5:47 PM said:
“when pigs fly”, did you not realize that for Liberals and their henchmen supporters, the Muslims, that TRUTH is the new “hate speech””.
Muslims hate the TRUTH, because they have no answers.. When they have no answers, that’s when they have to kill you to shut you up when they’re confronted with cold hard FACT ..
Did you know that a Muslim lawyer here in Australia when prosecuting two ex-Muslim pastors brought to trial for alleged “hate speech”, told the Judge “your Honor., TRUTH is NOT a DEFENCE”.
This was when the Pastors pointed out that the words they had quoted at a conference on Islam, were word perfect from the Quran!!
They asked to quote the verses and the JUDGE refused their request. This was a case brought by The Islamic Council of Victoria ..
This is the sort of kangaroo court that …Bob… is in favor of! Google it, you’ll find that our superior Court system won the day!!! STUFF Sharia Law!!
From: http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/in-imam-raufs-america-there-would-be-no-juries-for-civil-or-criminal-trials/ }
OM please read in detail about GEERT WILDERS he was told the same at his prosecution (persecution)
The TRUTH was irrelevant the charge is INCITEMENT or “hate speech”
of course the KORAN is all hate speech and Geert merely recited it verbatim, they said his film used images with the text that were “inflammatory”
so yes they denied that TRUTH mattered inthat case too
HATE SPECH laws are code for SHUT UP ANYONE who does not agree with ISLAm while ISLAm hides under relgious freedom- all it’s adherents preach hate speech every day-
MY fellow Americans: DO NOT ALLOW them to pass these laws in USA- they are bveing used as a weapon against us by ISLAm ONLY- these laws have nothing for other minoritites- we fought a REVOLUTION to DENY reglious authority to pusnish us for blasphemy and we like our freee speech- we will tolerate thier hate speechand NAzis hate speech if we have the FREEDOm to dissent and protest- to call a spade a spade- WE DO NOT CARE IF MUSLIM “feelings” get hurt- it is NOT A CRIME HERE (so far)
Can anyone say what does not INFLAME or UPSET Muslims? they use any excuse why should we be bound by their WHIMS their WHINES??
EVERY immigrant group to arrive in USA has hasd their share of epithets and insults and yet all survived nad blended into USA except one group-
at only 1 percent of USA population they surely creating way more than 1% of TROUBLE- they shoyuld be grateflly Americans didnt pull them from their beds on 9-12 and shoot them like Muslims would have to any of us in their natioins had we the audacity to DEMAND what they demand of us
Thanks for clarifying for Anne, “Isahiah62″. It would be good if Anne can also clarify, and see if she can post some helpful details like date of ruling, name of judge & Muslim lawyer, and case reference number, etc.
Now, i fully agree with your sentiments and views. In Singapore, our rule is that we can say anything so long as we have a good motive and can prove with evidences and sound arguments of what we have said or written.
That is the reason why the Singapore police did not want to act on the islamists’ complaints against me for sedition or blasphemy, as Singapore police did on complaints from islamists against many other non-Muslims.
Moreover, I have been promoting the goodness of their Quran and hadiths, while those islamists only seem to have true faith in the bad and wrong teachings in their Quran and Hadiths.
So people here, like ‘Grammyof4″ may want to take note of what I am writing here, and how I avoided getting into legal problems with the way I approach on this hypersensitive subject..
May God be greatly praised.!
Have you been very harassed ? I’m very impressed you’re speaking out in such a sensitive place as Singapore. Take care and very best wishes…kc
Sorry. The title of my above post is left out. It should be:
“HOW I AVOIDED LEGAL PROBLEMS ON SUCH A HYPER-SENSITIVE SUBJECT IN SINGAPORE”
Our founding fathers would roll over in there grave we need to see whats happing if we don’t take a stand now it will be to late say no to sharia law islam can get the hell iut of america take there dam laws and go if thay want to stay here than keep our laws but don’t try to push your laws on us thay want to spread there laws and try to take over any way thay can. if you love this country start speaking up start town meetings and say no to islam and no to sharia laws
Every brave patriot should put bumper sticker (if available) or sign with Creeping sharia or jihad watch web. sights on vehicles!!!!!!!!!! Thank GOD Texans can carry guns. As in the day of Noah prepare!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[...] What was his argument? Why didn’t they put forth the best defense in the first place? Maybe Oklahoma should try again with the model legislation that worked in Tennessee and Louisiana. [...]
I applaud these lawyers. The problem I see is the interpretation of the law by the damnable judiciary. It was a judge in Oklahoma who put a hold on throwing out the case. It’s a judge who can overturn a jury verdict, it’s a judge who interprets the law. If the judiciary is poisoned in their thinking, what then? The separaration of church and state is such an important law; why don’t they get it?
Kcramone,
I don’t know, but its not just terror linked CAIR and other Stealth Jihad groups that oppose this thing.
Ironically leftwing groups that are normally good at keeping Christians from violating the establishment clause, actually opposed the ban. Americans United for The Separation of Church and State, thinks this is a good thing.
A-OK!: Judge Puts Temporary Block On Anti-Shariah Amendment
http://blog.au.org/2010/11/30/a-ok-judge-puts-temporary-block-on-anti-shariah-amendment/?utm_source=au-homepage&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Recently-on-homepage
Someone should tell them to stop listening to groups like CAIR. These people really should do their research instead of assuming that this is all just a bunch bigotry because people in the religious right support it and Islam is a minority here.
What was that, that one of CAIR’s founding members said about Islam not being in America to be equal to other religions?
But it is terror-linked CAIR who is leading the legal jihad…and stealth jihadists have infiltrated the DOJ, ACLU and other groups that wield influence and power.
Creeping,
They maybe leading the charge, but it just ticks me off that liberal watch dogs are helping them in their quest to turn America into an Islamic State weather they realize it or not.
The left advocates for islam. They look upon their “poor brothers and sisters” who are being subjected to prejudice. The left also believes that the vast majority of muslims in America aren’t terrorists but just regular people who are getting a bad rap cuz of jihadists and terrorists. They do not get the concept of creeping sharia and that the average muslim doesn’t want to integrate into western society but are trying to take over. What also occurs to me is that the hardened left wants the destruction of America, wants the end of free enterprise, and of course loves obama.I literally pray the average American is waking up to the traitor that is obama and that islam is a violent, political idealogy. Maybe because it is a violent ideology that wants to destroy America, the leftists admire it. Bizarro world…