BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) - A bill to prohibit judges from applying foreign laws in their courtrooms interferes with religious freedom and unfairly targets Muslims, opponents of the measure told lawmakers Wednesday.
But Republican Rep. Kim Koppelman, the measure’s primary sponsor, told the Senate Judiciary Committee that it doesn’t target any religion and doesn’t violate the state and U.S. constitutions. He said in an interview prior to his comments to the committee that he could not cite a specific example of a judge applying foreign laws in court.
The measure does not specifically name Sharia law, which is used in some parts of the Islamic world.
Proponents call the bill “American Laws for American Courts.” More than a dozen similar measures are being considered in other states. Opponents have referred to them as anti-Sharia bills and say they are fueled by anti-Islamic sentiment.
Jennifer Cook, policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of North Dakota, said the bills are “susceptible to constitutional challenge.”
“There is significant evidence on the record that the intended purpose for the introduction and passage of such laws is to single out the Muslim faith and deny religious freedom to those people who follow Islam,” she said.
Opponents say the North Dakota bill is searching for a problem and isn’t necessary because the U.S. and state constitutions supersede foreign law.
Christopher Dodson, executive director of the North Dakota Catholic Conference, said the measure “unduly interferes with religious freedom and upends well-established law.”
The GOP-led North Dakota House approved the measure in February. The full state Senate will debate the bill later, after it gets a recommendation from that chamber’s judiciary committee.
If approved by the Legislature, it is unclear whether GOP Gov. Doug Burgum would sign it. Mike Nowatzki, a Burgum spokesman, said the governor had not reviewed the measure.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.