Judge Rules American Courts Can Use Sharia Law

Ruling upholds Islamic law in mosque case


This is a rush transcript from "The Five," October 26, 2011. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: And yet, another example of America bending over backwards to be inclusive. A Florida appeals court has just cleared the way for lawsuit over a monetary dispute at a mosque to be determined by Islamic Sharia law -- in a U.S. court, no less. It's not the first time. But why is it happening at all?

Kimberly, the legal eagle here.


BOLLING: Sharia law shouldn't --

GUILFOYLE: You know my opinion on this, right?

BOLLING: I don't.

GUILFOYLE: I think it's serious and should not be allowed at all. This should frighten people that this is even acceptable that a judge says, OK, wait a second, you can use it. It's not the law of the United States.

So what is his legal authority for allowing Sharia law to be implemented in the court system? Wake up, we have the U.S. Constitution. Those are the laws we're governed by. Not Sharia law.

BOB BECKEL, CO-HOST: But there's been a long history of using -- the courts using laws, religious laws, when there's dispute between two people in the same fate within an organization. They've used Jewish law in cases where the Talmudic law, I believe they call it, and it has been done in 26 states, cases where Sharia law has been cited.

I don't see what the problem is. It's like if you had a dispute and say in Eric's country club for example. They would go in and --

BOLLING: I don't have a country club. First of all, every night, reference --

GUILFOYLE: That's international law.

BOLLING: Please, do you see a problem --

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: I got to tell you --

BOLLING: -- where we're expecting our judges and juries know the Islamic law, read the Koran before you decide this case?

GUTFELD: But I mean, I think, Eric, everyone knows the practice of law was perfected by sixth century goat herders. And if you disagree with that, you're clearly Islamophobic.



BECKEL: Exactly right.

GUILFOYLE: Is everyone getting a little nuts? Or --

BECKEL: No, no, I don't understand.

GUILFOYLE: You can't codify Sharia law.

BECKEL: Nobody mentioned this -- if we look at our research that we had today, it goes back -- many, many states have used it over many --

BOLLING: A few times.

BECKEL: Twenty-six states.

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: No, not Sharia. That Talmudic law, that was a reference to that in terms of the states. The Sharia law is a new thing.

BECKEL: What it should be different than Talmudic law?

PERINO: Well, why I don't understand is, OK, so if you say that you are -- accept the idea that Sharia law should be allowed in the courts. But at the same time, why do we have all of these people who are trying to take away, like manger scenes that are traditional at a lot of these courthouses?

GUTFELD: Yes, that's a good point.

PERINO: That bothers me.


GUTFELD: They pick and choose. For example, OK, if we are going to do this in this court, then, theoretically I should be able to get rid of my mortgage interest on my house because Sharia law outlaws --


BOLLING: Hold on. What about if it's -- if this sets precedent, there not going to be a day where a judge says, by the way, under Sharia law, you ripped off, you stole that thing over there. We need to cut your left hand off.


BECKEL: By the way, did you make these arguments over Jewish law being used in the courts where they've been using it for years? Or do you're just find -- you actually just say now because it's Muslims? Muslims and Jewish, they're using their own religious laws.

BOLLING: Number one I don't necessarily believe they're using different laws in the U.S. courts.

GUILFOYLE: If you think that honor killings are OK, sure, codify Sharia law. And if you think the amputations are fine, husbands are allowed to kill their wives.

BECKEL: That's not what we're talking about here.

GUILFOYLE: I am talking about it, because it's all under Sharia law.

BECKEL: Do you agree that the courts have used Talmudic law in Jewish cases and Sharia law in Muslim cases? That that's been done, right?

GUILFOYLE: Do I agree that it has occurred in court? Yes. Do I think it's appropriate? No. We should not apply international law in the United States of America. We have a set of laws.

BOLLING: There are no states -- we've been told, there are no states in the Union that recognize Sharia law to be supreme to the Constitution of the United States.

BECKEL: No, of course not. Of course not.

The question is: do they use it in certain cases between people of the same faith? That's -- Jews have done it. And the Muslims have done it. What is the big deal? This is not chopping somebody's hands off.

BOLLING: Once you open the door to anything, then you can expand. It can be used as precedent. We'll see it all over the place.

Let's move on to topic two. A Mexican ID is being issued in Sonoma County, California. In other words, if you're a Mexican illegal or legal for that matter, but an illegal, if you come over to California, go to Sonoma County, go to the consulate, get an ID, Dana, that has your name on it, allowing you to do things like cash checks. Even apply for driver's license.

PERINO: When I first heard of this, I thought, that must be just be for people who are here legally and working. But when we called to find out that's not the case. And I suppose in Sonoma County -- Kimberly, correct me if I'm wrong -- that's the place where if you get pulled over, they are not allowed to ask in one of those cities where you don't have to -- not allowed to ask.

GUILFOYLE: Sanctuary.

PERINO: Sanctuary. Thank you. Looking for the word.

But, apparently, it's for everybody.

GUILFOYLE: It's legal and illegal status.

PERINO: Yes. And the sheriff shouted it from the rooftop, he was so proud of it. He said then people wouldn't have to be in jail for no reason.

I'm like, if you are here illegally, then why do we have laws at all?

BOLLING: There's an example right there.

GUILFOYLE: Right. There is an example of this.

So statistics on this, advocates on behalf of the immigrants said that almost half of the 921 immigrants turned over to ICE authorities hadn't committed a crime, and another third had committed minor offenses. So, they are saying this is invaluable policing resources that are being diverted to deal with it. And this will, in fact, reduce that.


BECKEL: I can't -- I suppose I should don't this, because it's Greg's prop there.


BECKEL: You guys think the same way.

This flag that he brought out here is a sign they use in the streets in southern California, particularly, where kids have been killed crossing the row. It's nothing to do with this topic at well. It has something


BECKEL: It's unbelievable you bring that here.

GUTFELD: Can I pose a simple scenario? Just real, simple scenario?

BECKEL: And by the way, what is wrong with having those ID cards?

GUTFELD: What if someone with a Mexican ID wants to use Sharia law to get rid of the interest on his student loan? What do you do then?


BOLLING: But, look, I have broken the law already. I'm an illegal.

So, Kimberly, the assessment they make there that they haven't broken the law, well, they have already broke the law. They're here illegally.

That's the problem.

GUILFOYLE: It seems to be, you know, an inclination for people to say, to ignore that that's the first right, that's what they are breaking the law. They don't consider it breaking the law. And, in fact, they want amnesty for people who are here illegally. That's one of their demands.

BECKEL: The Congress of the United States appropriates $400 million a year to deport people -- I mean, deport -- enough money to support 400,000 illegal immigrants a year and they have already done that. This would put all the people in jail and cost the Sonoma a fortune to keep them there until they get through the due process.

PERINO: That's why the state of Texas is suing the federal government for more money in order to do the job that they've been asked to do that our government is not doing.

BOLLING: You know what a great segment is? Why it costs us $30,000 per illegal immigrant to process and send back to wherever they came from -

- 30 grand each.

BECKEL: I want to send them all to your beach house.

BOLLING: All right. We've got to leave it there. By the way, this is -- this is actually a safety sign. Bob is right. It's topical.

Illegal immigration, it's all along the border, Bob. All along the border.

Content and Programming Copyright 2011 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2011 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.