The Judge issuing the temporary restraining order blocking implementation of Oklahoma's Sharia amendment has published her ruling, which is now online. Judge Vicki Miles-Lagrange found merit in the plaintiff's contention that the measure improperly entangles church and state.
Plaintiff contends that State Question 755’s amendment to Oklahoma’s constitution violates the Establishment Clause because it has a purpose and effect that is sectarian and because it necessitates excessive religious entanglement. Specifically, plaintiff asserts that State Question 755’s origins establish that the amendment’s actual purpose is to disapprove of plaintiff’s faith….
Plaintiff further contends that because the amendment directs Oklahoma’s state courts to make intrusive judgments regarding contested questions of religious belief or practice, the amendment excessively entangles Oklahoma in plaintiff’s faith. Specifically, the amendment forbids state courts from considering Sharia Law in any of its proceedings. Plaintiff asserts that there is no single religious text that all Muslims accept as the exclusive source for what constitutes Sharia Law and, consequently, to comply with the amendment, state courts will be faced with determining the content of Sharia Law.
Having reviewed plaintiff’s complaint and memorandum, and having heard the arguments presented at the hearing, the Court finds plaintiff has shown a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of his claim asserting a violation of the Establishment Clause. Specifically, the Court finds that plaintiff has made a preliminary showing that State Question 755’s amendment does not have a secular purpose, that its primary purpose inhibits religion, and that it fosters an excessive government entanglement with religion.
