By Constitution Staff

An Oklahoma constitutional amendment banning state courts from considering or using Islamic Sharia law will remain on hold. On January 10, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver upheld an injunction against the amendment until a lawsuit challenging its constitutionality can be heard. The court ruled 3-0 to uphold the temporary restraining order that was issued by Chief Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange, chief of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma in November of 2010. The state had appealed that decision to the 10th Circuit. Following the decision by the Denver-based court, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt said in a statement, "My office will continue to defend the state in this matter and proceed with the merits of the case."

Judge Miles-LaGrange blocked the state from certifying the amendment until a final determination is made in a lawsuit brought by Muneer Awad, the director of the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). The ruling means the injunction will stay in place while Awad's lawsuit is considered. Awad, said the Oklahoma amendment is among 20 similar pieces of legislation introduced in state legislatures nationwide. Critics say CAIR is a terrorist-supportive organization with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, HAMAS and Hezbollah.

Lawyers for the state had argued that Awad's challenge was premature since it came before the law was even in place. But, Judge Miles-LaGrange disagreed and issued the injunction blocking the state Election Board from certifying the election results. State Question 755, the "Save Our State" constitutional amendment, was approved by 70 percent of Oklahoma voters on Nov. 2, 2010. The amendment was authored by former state Rep. Rex Duncan (R-Sand Springs) who called it a pre-emptive strike to keep state judges from considering Islamic law. The measure defines Sharia law as Islamic law based on the Quran and the teachings of Mohammed. The amendment also bars state courts from considering international law. Judges in other states and on the federal bench have increasingly turned to citing international law in their court decisions. There have also been attempts to allow Sharia or Islamic law to be considered in cases, such as family law.

Four groups joined with Oklahoma in defending the amendment. The groups filed a friend-of-the-court legal brief saying that the ban of Islamic law in state courts is needed to protect women from such practices as honor killing, polygamy, marital rape and underage marriage. The four groups include U.S. Border Control, the U.S. Border Control Foundation, the Lincoln Institute for Research and Education, and the Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund.

Sen. Anthony Sykes, (R-Moore), the Senate sponsor of the amendment, called the court's decision an attempt to silence the voice of 70 percent of Oklahoma voters. "This is just the first battle in an ongoing effort. Although the courts have attempted to silence the voice of the people, I won't let that happen. I'll continue fighting to restore government to the people."