Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski
I took your earlier point to be that the proposed law was absurd since sharia would never be raised as a basis for a court to use comity. now, as "futher proof" that the law was unnecessary you submit a case where a court was asked to do just that.
See? that means the Oklahoma congressman who suggested the law was not fully paranoid.
and beore you start your drivel, let me say that i thought the law stupid and very unwise as it would pretty much cause every other country to throw out comity WRT Oklahoma, so I'm not saying the proposed law was well thought, I'm saying hiring you was perhaps a poor decision by your new firm 
and I'm not happy to have reached that conclusion as I'm promising myself to be even nicer this new year's! |
What I enjoy about this is that post-Oklahoma law, of course, the argument will still be made, now combined with an argument that the Oklahoma law doesn't apply or is unconstitutional.
If the goal was to prevent the argument from being made, they should enact a law that criminalizes anyone who ever makes such an argument. They passed the wrong law!
Can someone forward this to the appropriate Oklahoma legislator, so they'll have the benefit of the highpowered legal team of Hank & GGG?
See what we can accomplish when we work together!
