Introduced as a proposed Constitutional Amendment in the US Senate for at least the third time in the last sesseion. Although it failed, again, it seems to have picked up a few more votes at each of it's ressurections and certainly will return:

`Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an entity of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer or agent of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official or personal capacity), concerning that entity's, officer's, or agent's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.

So if an Islamic believer gets elected to any local office he can declare that his religious belief demands the death penalty for adultery, must impose Shar'iah law, and the Supreme Court can't hear a protest, since *he can cite:

acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law.

Of course the Supreme Court will also be barred from hearing the protest "We didn't mean that God."

* he and not he/she, because God says women shouldn't run for office - or vote - or complain when their **husbands beat them.

** Shar'iah law is much less permissive of brutality in "discipline" of one's wife than the doctrine of many of the fundies in my area, and fudies could also be elected hold many offices already.

So we're morally superior? Maybe only temporarily, if the theocrats continue their gains.

John