Written by Center for Security Policy
Kansas bill protecting fundamental constitutional rights from foreign laws goes to governor’s desk following bi-partisan legislative victory
Topeka, KS, May 16 2012 - On Friday May 11, the American Laws for American Courts legislation (SB79) to protect the fundamental constitutional rights of Kansas residents was approved by a bi-partisan 33-3 Senate vote following the unanimous 120-0 passage in the House earlier in the week.
The Kansas bill, sponsored by Rep. Peggy Mast, is based closely on the American Laws for American Courts (ALAC) model legislation put forth by the American Public Policy Alliance (APPA). Thousands of Kansans came out in bi-partisan support of ALAC. Legislators reported receiving over 30,000 emails, phone calls and letters in support of the legislation.
This unequivocal victory for the Kansas law in the House and Senate is the latest vindication of a long-term national trend supporting constitutional protections for ALL Americans against foreign laws and foreign legal doctrines that have found their way into our court systems.
ALAC passed with broad bipartisan support in Kansas, just as it did previously in Tennessee, Louisiana and Arizona. The APPA has previously stated that their goal is to extend ALAC’s constitutional protections to all 50 states by 2020.
ALAC was also passed by overwhelming margins in state Houses in Florida, Oklahoma, New Hampshire, and Missouri, the Indiana Senate, and the Judiciary Committees of Florida, Georgia and Alabama, only to be scuttled in last-minute interventions by special interests acting against the wishes of the vast majority of voters and legislators.
The following statistics demonstrate the strong and growing support by majorities of legislators for ALAC across the United States:
This comes despite well-funded efforts opposing the bill by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Council on American Islamic Relations, as well as a $3 million national PR campaign to bring Shariah law to America, backed by the Muslim Brotherhood-tied Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA).
“American Laws for American Courts is the primary 21st Century civil rights initiative to ensure constitutional liberties for all Americans,” said Center for Security Policy President Frank J. Gaffney Jr. “It is needed especially to protect women and children, who have been identified by international human rights organizations as the primary victims of discriminatory foreign laws.”
At the website Shariah Law and American State Courts, the Center for Security Policy has compiled fifty cases in 23 states showing examples of a representative foreign legal system - Islamic Shariah Law - introduced into American courts, in conflict with the Constitution or state public policy in the particular cases.
SOURCE: Center for Secuirty Policy
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?