thebigp

When you start seeing Shariah-compliant rulings coming from these judges, don't say you weren't warned.
Tim Brown — January 22, 2019—freedom outpost
At the end of November 2018, I reported on the number of Muslims that won political office during the e******ns. However, have you heard of the Muslim judges that were elected to be on the bench in several key states?
California, Michigan, Texas and New York all elected Muslim judges.
At least six positions for judge were filled by Muslims. Keep in mind, that their ideology, theology and law are diametrically opposed to American and Biblical law.
The following is the list of these six judges:
• Adel A. Harb is the nonpartisan judge of the 3rd Circuit Court in Michigan.
Harb was appointed on October 22, 2015, by Republican Governor Rick Snyder to fill the vacancy left by the retirement of Daniel Ryan. He ran unopposed for e******n in 2016 to serve out the remainder of Ryan's term.
• George Abdallah Jr. is the nonpartisan judge of the Superior Court of San Joaquin County California Office 12 in California.
Abdallah earned his undergraduate degree from the University of California and his J.D. from Humphreys College of Law.
• Halim Dhanidina is a nonpartisan Division 3 judge of the California 2nd District Court of Appeal. Gov. Jerry Brown (D) appointed Dhanidina to replace Justice Richard Aldrich on July 24, 2018, and he was confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments on August 23, 2018.
Dhanidina was previously a judge on the Superior Court of Los Angeles County in California from 2012 to 2018. He was appointed by Governor Jerry Brown in May 2012 to a newly created position.
Dhanidina was the first American-Muslim judge to be appointed to a California court.
Dhanidina received his undergraduate degree from Pomona College and J.D. degree from UCLA School of Law.
• Rabeea Collier is the Democratic judge of the Texas District Court 113 in Texas. Collier was elected to the office on November 6, 2018.
Collier was a 2016 candidate for the Texas 11th District Court in Texas. Collier lost in a primary runoff e******n on May 24, 2016.
Collier earned her B.A. in government from the University of Texas-Austin. She later received a J.D. from Texas Southern University. Collier is a private practice attorney.
• Sam Salamey is the nonpartisan judge of the Michigan Nineteenth Judicial District Court in Michigan.
Salamey received his undergraduate degree from Wayne State University in 1982 and his J.D. from the Thomas M. Cooley Law School in 1985.
• Shahabuddeen Ally is a Democratic judge of the New York City Civil Court New York County. Ally was elected to the office on November 6, 2018.
So, when you start seeing Shariah-compliant rulings coming from these judges, don't say you weren't warned.
It isn't like we haven't been seeing Muslims attempting to set up their own tribunals in violation of state law, or even judges already beginning to render rulings that are unconstitutional and in adherence with Shariah.
source-Tim Brown- freedom outpost-

karpenter Loc: Headin' Fer Da Hills !!

are shariah-compliant rulings straight ahead?

Maybe Not Before The End Of This Week
But They Will Be Forthcoming
And They Will Go Through The Appeals Process
Inviting Even More

Our Judiciary Decided
It Is The Supreme Law Of The Land Long Ago
In Effect >> Our Mullas
So This Eventuality Was Only Inevitable

woodguru

No more than anti gay and a******n are by hard conservative judges...which is my point, no judge is okay that drifts from law to serve their own beliefs. We have protections against it and they are only as good as they are maintained against religious oriented judges.

woodguru

I worry about christian compliant rulings just as much as you worry about this. If our system works right as far as challenges for unconstitutional rulings we are good. Unfortunately we have a supreme court that would likely rule in favor of right leaning conservative religious values, as Kavanaugh already has in 2017 in an a******n case he was immediately overruled on. So now he's the highest court, who overrules him when he rules against legal a******ns?

karpenter Loc: Headin' Fer Da Hills !!

^ ^ ^ Pretending ^ ^ ^ Pretending ^ ^ ^

karpenter Loc: Headin' Fer Da Hills !!

Sotomayor Was Over-Turned 6 Out Of 7 Trips Before SCOTUS
The Last Time During Her Confirmation Hearings

Soto's Last Case Overturned, Even By Ginsberg
Was A Cut And Dry Fire Dept. Discrimination Suit

Kevyn

There is less threat from these Judges following Shiria Law than there is the beer drunk attempted rapist following Catholic Cannon Law, it is a non issue. Judges are bound by US law and our constitution.

woodguru

I didn't pretend that Kavanaugh took an a******n case and went far right of established law and tried to prevent this girl who was raped to get an a******n.

Established law was so cut and dried in favor of Kavanaugh ruling for the a******n rather than against that the fact he didn't is a red f**g that points to his unsuitability for the supreme court.

karpenter Loc: Headin' Fer Da Hills !!

But You Are Pretending A Lot Of Things

You All Do

Sicilianthing

>>>

Yep I posted this too a couple weeks ago and someone else posted more on other muslims in Offices and e******ns...

Thank You for putting it out here again... people need to be Slapped Awake.

We are under stealth encroachment replacement methodologies in full Deployment right under our nose.

If the founders were here we’d be shooting these invaders by now.

L8erToots

I agree with you up until your assessment of Justice Kavanaugh and blame the biased opinions of MSM "journalists" for the reason so many people share the same opinion as you. I've researched this extensively and offer the links to the official written opinions and dissents to those opinions for you or anyone else to make your own decision with all the actual facts and arguments between the judges.

Kavanaugh dissent, Garza v. Hargan, 2017:"The en banc majority has badly erred in this case. The three-judge panel held that the U.S. Government, when holding a pregnant unlawful immigrant minor in custody, may seek to expeditiously t***sfer the minor to an immigration sponsor before the minor makes the decision to obtain an a******n. That ruling followed from the Supreme Court’s many precedents holding that the Government has permissible interests in favoring fetal life, protecting the best interests of a minor, and refraining from facilitating a******n. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the Government may further those interests so long as it does not impose an undue burden on a woman seeking an a******n.

Today’s majority decision, by contrast, “substantially” adopts the panel dissent and is ultimately based on a constitutional principle as novel as it is wrong: a new right for unlawful immigrant minors in U.S. Government detention to obtain immediate a******n on demand, thereby barring any Government efforts to expeditiously t***sfer the minors to their immigration sponsors before they make that momentous life decision. The majority’s decision represents a radical extension of the Supreme Court’s a******n jurisprudence. It is in line with dissents over the years by Justices Brennan, Marshall, and Blackmun, not with the many majority opinions of the Supreme Court that have repeatedly upheld reasonable regulations that do not impose an undue burden on the a******n right recognized by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade".

Kavanaugh said the government was “merely seeking to place the minor in a better place when deciding whether to have an a******n.”

It was even possible the minor — who would have been 16 or 17 weeks pregnant at the end of those 11 days — would have been allowed to have the a******n if a sponsor had not been found, he said. (Texas outlaws a******ns after 20 weeks.)

Notably, Kavanaugh didn’t go as far as Judge Karen Henderson, who said unauthorized immigrant minors don’t have the right to an elective a******n.

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/09/kavanaugh-files-a******n-rights/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/brett-kavanaugh-raped-immigrant-a******n/

https://harvardlawreview.org/2018/04/garza-v-hargan/

And if you're like me, you'll want to read the actual legal court decision, which are online in .PDF form on the government website.