By Iman Abdulkadir Mohamed The Massachusetts Court of Appeals in Ravasizadeh v. Niakosari,[1] a case of first impression, held that a Muslim marriage contract is enforceable under neutral principles of … Continue reading The Massachusetts Court of Appeals in Ravasizadeh v. Niakosari
Contemporary Primary Sources: Supreme Court of New South Wales: Mohamed v Mohamed [2012] NSWSC 852
The first defendant (Neima Mohamed, herein Neima), as the plaintiff in the court of first instance, had submitted that: On 4 April 2004, she and the plaintiff (Mostafa Mohamed, herein … Continue reading Contemporary Primary Sources: Supreme Court of New South Wales: Mohamed v Mohamed [2012] NSWSC 852
Islamic Law in U.S. Courts: In re: The Marriage of Awatef and Nabil Dajani (Cal. Ct. App. 1988): Divorce Proceeding
In a divorce proceeding involving a prenuptial agreement (Islamic marriage contract) between a Muslim husband and wife, the California Court of Appeals considered the validity of a provision requiring the … Continue reading Islamic Law in U.S. Courts: In re: The Marriage of Awatef and Nabil Dajani (Cal. Ct. App. 1988): Divorce Proceeding
The Irony of Sharī’a Bans: Part III
By Haider Ala Hamoudi In my two previous posts on the matter of mahr in U.S. courts, I made the point that the enforceability of the mahr, or the nuptial … Continue reading The Irony of Sharī’a Bans: Part III
The Irony of Sharī’a Bans: Part II
By Haider Ala Hamoudi My previous post explained the problems surrounding the enforceability in U.S. courts of the Islamic mahr—the nuptial payment that a groom or his family must provide … Continue reading The Irony of Sharī’a Bans: Part II
The Irony of Sharī’a Bans: Part I
By Haider Ala Hamoudi The most common criticism of legislative attempts to ban the “creeping” of sharī'a into United States Courts is that they serve no actual purpose. That is, … Continue reading The Irony of Sharī’a Bans: Part I