But judges admit tax funds used ‘for arguably religious purposes’.
A federal appeals court says a Marine can’t challenge a U.S. government subsidy for a program that promotes Shariah, that radical Islamic law that includes chopping off hands for theft and beheading for leaving Islam. The ruling came today from Alan Norris, Eric Clay and Allen Griffin, judges on the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Authorizing legislation didn’t consider giving money to aid religious outreaches such as AIG’s Shariah programs, and that the money was directed there by “executive” decisions.
The Treasury Department acquired an interest in AIG, the “department sponsored a conference entitled ‘Islamic Finance 101.’ The stated purpose of the conference was to provide government policymakers information about Islamic finance. The presentation materials from the conference discussed topics such as the source of Islamic finance, how Islamic finance works, and the market factors that caused its growth.”
The plaintiffs argued that Congress could or should have known its bailout money to AIG would go to Shariah “since AIG was well known as the leader in [Shariah complaint finance].” The $153 million of U.S. taxpayer money spent supporting Islamic Shariah really isn’t anything worth mentioning. AIG insurance, which operates multiple companies promoting Shariah-complaint insurance products. At the district court level, the case was dismissed by Judge Lawrence Zatkoff, who ruled that the case needed yet to prove that “the diverted funds were not de minimus in relation to the total amount…” The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines de minimus as “so minor as to merit disregard.” The district court had to concede that after cash-strapped AIG received billions of dollars in taxpayer money … it provided two of its SCF [Shariah-compliant] subsidiaries with at least $153 million.” The lawsuit alleges that the U.S. government’s takeover and financial bailout of AIG was in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. AIG has five subsidiaries that promote and practice Shariah in Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Bahrain and the United States. Those companies hire Muslims to tell them how to meet the demands of Shariah, and the U.S. government.
September 2008 and continuing to the present), AIG was (and still is) the world leader in promoting Shariah-compliant insurance products. It is the Islamic code embodying the way of life for Muslims and is intended to serve as the civic law in Muslim countries.” As argued by AFLC, by propping up AIG with taxpayer funds, the U.S. government is directly and indirectly promoting Islam and, more troubling, Shariah.
Murray objects to his tax money being used to support Shariah because it “forms the basis for the global jihadist war against the West and the United States.”
First, it is contrary to controlling U.S. Supreme Court precedent, which allows a taxpayer to challenge a congressional spending program that violates the Establishment Clause. And second, this decision permits the federal government to continue its practice of promoting and supporting Shariah through the use of taxpayer funds. “AIG subsidiaries ensure the Shariah-compliance of its SCF products by obtaining consultation from ‘Shariah Supervisory Committees.’ The members of these committees are authorities in Shariah law and oversee the implementation of SCF products by reviewing AIG’s operations.