A quick question:  A federal district court in Oklahoma has just temporarily enjoined state officials "from certifying the election results for State Question 755."  Question 755 is a state constitutional amendment that bars the use of foreign law, international law, and Sharia law by Oklahoma courts.  (See http://volokh.com/2010/11/09/district-court-temporarily-enjoins-oklahoma-no-use-of-shariah-law-in-court-constitutional-amendment/ for more.)  The plaintiff's theory, which the court said was strong enough to justify a TRO, is that the ban on the use of Sharia law violates the First Amendment.  But I'm puzzled how this could justify an injunction barring officials from certifying election results, especially since the invalidity of the Sharia law provision might still leave the rest of the amendment enforceable (depending on what Oklahoma severability law says about such matters).  Any thoughts on what might be happening here?  Thanks,

Eugene

_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law