This Montana Lawmaker Has Just Taken A Bold Step To Protect And Ensure American Justice

I hope Senate Bill 199 — “The Primacy of Montana Law” spreads across the nation and fast. It’s vital that it does to stop the spread of Sharia law throughout our court and legal systems. Sharia law does not follow our laws – it does not hold Constitutional law as the supreme law of the land. Muslims who adhere to Sharia law answer to the Quran and Allah. Not so much our laws; they come second if at all. Regardless what a federal judge rules, Americans will not stand for the enforcing of Islamic law in our communities. An imam and his enclave are trying to do just that in Texas. It must not stand.

From Western Journalism:

Senate Bill 199 — “The Primacy of Montana Law” — would prohibit the use of foreign laws and religious customs in Montana courts. Introduced by Republican state Sen. Janna Taylor, the measure is reportedly modeled on similar “anti-Sharia” legislation that has passed in Louisiana, Kansas, and Tennessee.

The website Freedom Outpost says that Taylor’s bill “would nullify any ‘court, arbitration or administrative agency ruling’ that relies on any foreign law contrary to rights guaranteed to Montanans by the state or U.S. constitutions.”

The Christian Action Network hails the bill whose sponsor claims “would particularly protect the rights of women and children, who do not necessarily receive the same protections under other legal systems that they do in the United States.”

In an article on its website, the Christian Action Network notes that Islamic law, known as Sharia, has been used in American courts on numerous occasions to override U.S. law under the guise of “religious freedom.”

“Montana may be on the brink of accomplishing what Congress, the federal court system and all but three other states could not: Banning Islamic Shariah law from being used in state courts.”

You might recall that one of the first states to try to prevent judges from referring to Sharia in their rulings was Oklahoma, where, in 2010, voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure to amend the state constitution to ban Sharia from state courts.

However, the voters’ will was soon thwarted. Despite being updated to include all foreign or religious laws, the ban was overturned by a federal judge who ruled the law to be unconstitutional and blocked the state from putting it into effect.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) — which successfully challenged the Oklahoma law — has condemned attempts by state legislatures to keep Sharia out of the court system, calling recent legislative bans “a disturbing trend” that displays “anti-Muslim bigotry.”

On its website, the ACLU argues against efforts in Montana and numerous other states to mandate that only U.S. law, as duly passed and constitutionally authorized, can be considered by state court judges.

“Efforts to single out Muslims and to advance the ugly idea that anything Islamic is un-American are unjust and discriminatory and should be rejected.”

This does not have anything to do with bigotry. Americans follow American laws and the Constitution. How would it fly if we took Biblical law or Jewish law and forced America to submit to those rules? It would never be allowed, because we are a melting pot of religions and traditions. So, how is it that Islamic law should be allowed to subvert and override our laws when no other outside or religious system is allowed such leniency? Muslims are trying to use our own freedoms against us, to force us to accept Sharia law and all the horrors it brings with it. I think not.

Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Terresa Monroe-Hamilton is an editor and writer for Right Wing News. She owns and blogs at She is a Constitutional Conservative and NoisyRoom focuses on political and national issues of interest to the American public. Terresa is the editor at Trevor Loudon's site, New Zeal - She also does research at You can email Terresa here. NoisyRoom can be found on Facebook and on Twitter.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!