Democrat Governor Vetoes Ban on “Foreign Laws”

In another example for the you-gotta-be-kidding-me file …

Arizona’s Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed a bipartisan bill that would have banned the use of foreign laws in American courts. The legislation would prevent judges from using Sharia Law, Canon Law and other foreign laws or regulations as the basis for court decisions in Arizona. In some instances, such foreign laws allow honor killing, forced and underage marriages, genital mutilation, child labor, polygamy and other customs inconsistent with American law.

The problem is clear. American courts exist to apply American law rooted in the Constitution and principles of equality and due process. Yet attempts to import foreign legal systems persist. Judges have confronted arguments based on Sharia that excuse spousal abuse or limit women’s financial rights in divorce. In New Jersey, a trial judge initially denied a protective order to a woman who had been repeatedly beaten and raped. The court cited deference to Islamic law. An appellate court corrected the ruling, but the initial decision exposed the risk.

In other states, husbands have invoked religious marriage contracts to minimize obligations to ex-wives. Informal tribunals have operated under foreign codes within immigrant communities. Canon Law has influenced some family and inheritance disputes. These examples illustrate why explicit protection for domestic law remains necessary.

Governor Hobbs rejected the bipartisan legislation. She claimed that Sharia law and its abhorrent practices do not and will not exist in Arizona. She added that existing statutes already provide adequate safeguards and that the bill would trigger costly lawsuits.

While the invocation of foreign laws is not common, it is growing – and expected to grow even more with the ascendancy of left-wing policies, as seen in recent elections. Even if only as prophylactic, opposition to the proposed legislation is more left-wing stupidity.

One struggles to accept Hobbs’ serene dismissal. If the threat is truly imaginary, why fear a statute that merely restates the obvious? The veto preserves ambiguity. It theoretically would allow foreign visitors who break American laws to argue that the customs or statutes of their homeland should govern their liability. Such a result would fracture the unity of the legal system.

This veto stands as the latest example of left-wing Democrats undermining America’s customs and rule of law. They oppose immigration enforcement and defend sanctuary jurisdictions that nullify federal authority. They insist that biological males may compete in women’s sports, displacing female athletes and undermining sex-based categories. They support housing men in women’s prisons, disregarding the safety of female inmates. They elevate identity-based curricula in schools that prioritize grievance over merit. They characterize voter identification requirements as suppression rather than prudent protection of electoral integrity. In each instance, longstanding American norms bend to ideological pressure.

By vetoing this measure, Governor Hobbs has contributed to the pattern. She has chosen to leave Arizona courts without an added layer of clarity against foreign legal influences. The people of the state deserve leaders who defend the principle that one law applies to all within its borders, without exception for imported customs that contradict constitutional values. This decision falls short of that responsibility.

So, there ‘tis.