Suitably Flip

Judge Says Not To Seat First Mulsim Congressman-Elect

Interesting.

Judge Roy Moore (that Judge Roy Moore) believes that because the Quran dictates that Islamic law supercedes any secular system of laws, Democrat Keith Ellison (a Sunni Muslim from Minnesota elected to Congress last month) should not be seated in office if he insists on swearing his oath on the Quran.

Islamic law is simply incompatible with our law. Jaafar Sheikh Idris, founder and chairman of American Open University, a radical Islamic school that has received funding from suspected al-Qaida sources and which supports Islamic law, recently stated that “Islam cannot be separated from the state,” and that no Muslim elected to Congress or the White House can swear to uphold the United States Constitution and still be a Muslim, because the law of Allah as expressed in the Quran is supreme. Idris was recently deported for his illegal activities. While we certainly disagree with Idris’ radical extremism, he at least knows what Islam is all about!…
...
Our Constitution states, “Each House [of Congress] shall be the judge … of the qualifications of its own members.” Enough evidence exists for Congress to question Ellison’s qualifications to be a member of Congress as well as his commitment to the Constitution in view of his apparent determination to embrace the Quran and an Islamic philosophy directly contrary to the principles of the Constitution.

Which part of Article VI of the Constitution takes precedence - this part?

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;

Or the very next line?

... but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

So what happens when it's a religious observance itself that conflicts with upholding the oath to support the Constitution?

I can't imagine Ellison running into even a whiff of actual resistance, but to a non-Muslim non-lawyer, it seems like an interesting Constitutional pickle.

Comments

Judge Says Not To Seat First Mulsim Congressman-Elect

Interesting.

Judge Roy Moore (that Judge Roy Moore) believes that because the Quran dictates that Islamic law supercedes any secular system of laws, Democrat Keith Ellison (a Sunni Muslim from Minnesota elected to Congress last month) should not be seated in office if he insists on swearing his oath on the Quran.

Islamic law is simply incompatible with our law. Jaafar Sheikh Idris, founder and chairman of American Open University, a radical Islamic school that has received funding from suspected al-Qaida sources and which supports Islamic law, recently stated that “Islam cannot be separated from the state,” and that no Muslim elected to Congress or the White House can swear to uphold the United States Constitution and still be a Muslim, because the law of Allah as expressed in the Quran is supreme. Idris was recently deported for his illegal activities. While we certainly disagree with Idris’ radical extremism, he at least knows what Islam is all about!…
...
Our Constitution states, “Each House [of Congress] shall be the judge … of the qualifications of its own members.” Enough evidence exists for Congress to question Ellison’s qualifications to be a member of Congress as well as his commitment to the Constitution in view of his apparent determination to embrace the Quran and an Islamic philosophy directly contrary to the principles of the Constitution.

Which part of Article VI of the Constitution takes precedence - this part?

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;

Or the very next line?

... but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

So what happens when it's a religious observance itself that conflicts with upholding the oath to support the Constitution?

I can't imagine Ellison running into even a whiff of actual resistance, but to a non-Muslim non-lawyer, it seems like an interesting Constitutional pickle.