Texas Supreme Court: Texas law supersedes Islamic law

TX Supreme Court
Photo credit Getty Images

The Texas Supreme Court has sent a divorce case back to a Collin County court after ruling that a judge, not an Islamic Fiqh panel, should decide matters.

The case involves the pending divorce of Mariam Ayad and Ayad Hashim Latif, filed in January 2021. When the couple was married in 2008, they signed two documents entitled “Marriage Contract” and “Islamic Pre-Nuptial Agreement.” While the Marriage Contract is a largely ceremonial document, it is not in dispute. It’s the Pre-Nuptial agreement that is being challenged.

“In the Agreement, the parties recite their ‘belief that Islam . . . is binding on [them] in all spheres of life,” a court order says.  The agreement provides that “[a]ny conflict which may arise between the husband and the wife will be resolved according to the Qur’an, Sunnah, and Islamic Law in a Muslim court, or in [its] absence by a Fiqh Panel.”

The Fiqh panel consists of three people who serve as impartial arbitrators and judges, who are guided by Islamic law and principles.  The majority decision of the Fiqh Panel is binding and final.

But Ayad claims she was defrauded and had no idea she had signed the Pre-Nuptial agreement until recently.  The contract was signed in front of witnesses at the wedding.

“She was signing the ceremonial contract.  They lifted the corner.  She signed the second page thinking it was just a direct duplicate of the document,” said Michelle O’Neil, attorney for Ayad.  O’Neil says by chance, a child who had just been given a video camera as a present recorded the entire ceremony.

But the document held up during a hearing in front of Hon. Judge Andrea Thompson to determine the enforceability of the agreement.

An imam testified as an expert on Latif’s behalf, but the trial court refused to allow Ayad to testify on the term’s ambiguity, which it concluded was a “legal question.” Shortly thereafter, the trial court concluded it would order the parties to arbitrate under the Agreement, the Supreme Court order says.

That still rankles O’Neil.

“Under Islamic law, the wife doesn’t get a say.  The wife doesn’t get to present evidence.  She has to have three people confirm her side of the story for her to be taken seriously under Islamic law,” O’Neil said.  “Are we going to apply our U.S. Constitution where everybody gets an equal say and an opportunity to be heard, or are we going to apply Islamic law where women’s rights are so incredibly deficient compared to men?  That’s the issue that’s going to be before the trial court.”

Because custody of a child is involved, the Supreme Court issued a writ of mandamus ordering a hearing.

“The error here is not that the trial court reached the wrong conclusion regarding whether to compel arbitration. Rather, the error is that the trial court did not follow a statutory command—unique to the divorce context—that it try issues of validity and enforceability prior to ordering arbitration, and thus it reached no conclusion on those issues at all.” the opinion says.

The Supreme Court remanded the case back to Judge Thompson with the expectation she would conduct further proceedings in accordance with the opinion.

Attorneys for Latif did not return our call.

LISTEN on the Audacy App

Tell your Smart Speaker to "PLAY 1080 KRLD"

Sign Up and Follow NewsRadio 1080 KRLD

Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Featured Image Photo Credit: Getty Images