Mamdani's wife liked social media posts 'cheering on' Hamas' Oct 7 massacre of Israelis: report

Grokmaster said:
And they continue to this day.

Try to keep up Betty.

Sharia Courts Are a Reality in Europe​

As the Israeli Foreign Minister Just Told the Dutch Government, ‘Good Luck with Radical Islam’​

www.meforum.org

Sharia Courts Are a Reality in Europe

As the Israeli Foreign Minister Just Told the Dutch Government, 'Good Luck with Radical Islam'
www.meforum.org www.meforum.org

Police ‘turn blind eye’ to sharia courts in Britain​

‘Privatisation of justice’ in some Muslim communities blamed as only 3pc of so-called honour crimes are successfully prosecuted

Etc...etc...ad nauseum....
Click to expand...

There are sharia, jewish, and christian courts in the US.

Why? They are run by contract law.

If they make decisions that conflict with American law, the findings are null and void.
 
Jake Starkey said:
There are sharia, jewish, and christian courts in the US.

Why? They are run by contract law.

If they make decisions that conflict with American law, the findings are null and void.
Click to expand...
No religious courts have legal standing in the US.


Get a fucking clue, willya ?
 
Jake Starkey said:
There are sharia, jewish, and christian courts in the US.

Why? They are run by contract law.

If they make decisions that conflict with American law, the findings are null and void.
Click to expand...

Yes — Jewish, Muslim, and Christian religious courts can operate in the United States under contract law, as long as participation is voluntary and outcomes do not violate the U.S. Constitution or public policy. This is done through religious arbitration, which U.S. courts generally treat the same as any other private arbitration agreement.

Why did you not know that?

www.culawreview.org/journal/faith-based-arbitration-first-amendment-freedom-or-major-concern?utm_source=copilot.com
 
Jake Starkey said:
Yes — Jewish, Muslim, and Christian religious courts can operate in the United States under contract law, as long as participation is voluntary and outcomes do not violate the U.S. Constitution or public policy. This is done through religious arbitration, which U.S. courts generally treat the same as any other private arbitration agreement.

Why did you not know that?

www.culawreview.org/journal/faith-based-arbitration-first-amendment-freedom-or-major-concern?utm_source=copilot.com
Click to expand...
Because it's com[plete bullshit, legally speaking.

No verdict will crry legal weight.


Why do you not know that?
 
grokmaster knows shit. Contract law, whether religious or secular, is controlled by federal and state law.

This person knows nothing about it.

1775001957145.png
 
Last edited:
Grokmaster said:
Because it's com[plete bullshit, legally speaking.

No verdict will crry legal weight.


Why do you not know that?
Click to expand...
Look before you jump next time. The proceedings do have legal weight for the simple reason the parties have agreed in advance that they shall. Same as any bona fide arbtration proceeding.
 
Jake Starkey said:
grokmaster knows shit. Contract law, whether religious or secular, is controlled by federal and state law.

This person knows nothing about it.

View attachment 79778
Click to expand...
That is not criminal court, dumbfuck ; strawman ,much?
Religious courts and tribunals (such as Catholic tribunals, Beth Din, or Islamic tribunals) have legal standing in the U.S. only as voluntary arbitration bodies, not as replacements for state/federal law.
 
Last edited:
martin said:
Look before you jump next time. The proceedings do have legal weight for the simple reason the parties have agreed in advance that they shall. Same as any bona fide arbtration proceeding.
Click to expand...
No different than a handshake; not criminal court, Einstein.
Religious courts and tribunals (such as Catholic tribunals, Beth Din, or Islamic tribunals) have legal standing in the U.S. only as voluntary arbitration bodies, not as replacements for state/federal law.
 
martin said:
Always good to know the loudmouth nitwits like yourself flock to the other side.
Click to expand...
Religious courts and tribunals (such as Catholic tribunals, Beth Din, or Islamic tribunals) have legal standing in the U.S. only as voluntary arbitration bodies, not as replacements for state/federal law.


Dumbfuck.
 
Grokmaster said:
Religious courts and tribunals (such as Catholic tribunals, Beth Din, or Islamic tribunals) have legal standing in the U.S. only as voluntary arbitration bodies, not as replacements for state/federal law.


Dumbfuck.
Click to expand...
In your own dumb way you just repeated what I said, and what Starkey said.
 
martin said:
In your own dumb way you just repeated what I said, and what Starkey said.
Click to expand...
No dumbfuck; they are not "courts" ; they are no different than any other business meeting. They cannot IMPOSE anything, like an actual court.

They cannot enforce anything, that is not a MUTUAL AGREEMENT.


Have one of the grownups explain it to you.
 
You are typical Maga, where "I want" substitutes for law or regulation. Your opinion has no weight. The citations are placed at the bottom of the discussion for your to read. You are wrong, as usual. Of course, you are, for you are maga. Your opinion about Mrs. Mamdani is yours to express, but it means nothing in law.

Sharia law is allowed not as a legal system superior to federal law or that of States, but people are allowed to practice their religion, including Sharia (Islamic contract law) as long as it does not violate US law.

The free exercise clause protects religious practice where it does not conflict with civil or criminal law.

This is the same rule that applies to:
  • Sharia Law
  • Jewish Halakha
  • Catholic Canon Law
  • LDS Church disciplinary rules
  • Any other religious code
Any person can enter by mutual agreement into contract under the above laws, codes, and rules, but it cannot override U.S. civil or criminal law.

However, courts can enforce religious‑based contracts if:
  • Both parties voluntarily agreed
  • The terms don’t violate public policy
For example:
  • A Muslim couple may sign a mahr (marriage contract).
  • A court may enforce it as a contract, not as “Sharia law.”
This is identical to how courts treat:
  • Jewish ketubah contracts
  • Catholic annulment agreements
  • LDS temple sealing agreements (as private religious matters)
People may practice Sharia in ways that do not conflict with civil or criminal law, such as:
  • Dietary rules (halal)
  • Prayer practices
  • Fasting
  • Religious marriage ceremonies
  • Religious arbitration (similar to Jewish Beth Din courts)
    • Only if both parties agree
    • And only if the outcome doesn’t violate U.S. law
This is protected under the First Amendment.

Any religious practice — Sharia or otherwise — is illegal if it violates U.S. law.

Examples:
  • Polygamy
  • Physical punishments
  • Gender‑based legal inequality
  • Any action that violates civil rights or criminal statutes
These are prohibited regardless of religion.

allaboutlawyer.com/sharia-law-in-america-sharia-law-cant-override-us-civil-law-but-2025-bills-seek-new-bans-despite-constitutional-protections/?utm_source=copilot.com

factually.co/fact-checks/justice/implementing-sharia-law-us-constitution-conflict-50b756?utm_source=copilot.com

legalclarity.org

Sharia Law in the US: Legal Status and Enforceability

Analyzing the enforceability of Sharia in US courts, detailing how constitutional law governs its application in contracts and family disputes.
legalclarity.org legalclarity.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top