It’s part of his overall plan to get business to business cases settled quickly and fairly, but in allowing for sharia court to decide the dispute, it sets a dangerous precedent. To be fair, citizens are allowed by US law to have out of court litigations, for example, sports franchises do it all the time. The problems however, lie in the slippery slope analogy, where a court allows a business transaction to be decided upon in an Islamic court setting, but will latter include all kinds of other cases and all with the state’s approval. Such a thing cannot be allowed.
As the Tundra Tabloids sees it, the issue for judges and lawyers alike to consider, is that though the US Constitution guarantees the rights of its citizens to out of court litigation, it does not however, safeguard a system of jurisprudence that it stands in contradiction with. Islamic law cannot be, nor should it be, a viable alternative to state law, seeing that its far more than being simple religious litigation as in Christianity or Judaism. The judge here is guilt of mixing apples with oranges. KGS
UPDATE: There’s more to it.
But attorney Paul Thanasides last week appealed Nielson’s decision with the 2nd District Court of Appeal, saying religion has no place in a secular court. His client: the mosque. “The mosque believes wholeheartedly in the Koran and its teachings,” Thanasides said Monday. “They certainly follow Islamic law in connection with their spiritual endeavors. But with respect to secular endeavors, they believe Florida law should apply in Florida courts.”
This makes the judge into a class A moron. KGS
H/T: Scottish Infidel