North Carolina Judge
OKs Witness Oaths
Using Quran
By STEVE HARTSOE, AP
fromWRAL.com on the Web, May 25, 2007
RALEIGH, N.C. May 24 --
Witnesses and jurors being sworn in at state courthouses can take their oath
using any religious text, not just the Bible, a judge ruled Thursday.
Judge Paul Ridgeway said both common law and state Supreme Court precedent allow
witnesses and jurors to use the text "most sacred and obligatory upon their
conscience."
The ruling came after the American Civil Liberties Union argued that limiting
that text to the Bible was unconstitutional because it favored Christianity over
other religions.
The issue surfaced when Muslims tried to donate copies of the Quran to Guilford
County's two courthouses. Two judges declined to accept the texts, saying
that taking an oath on the Quran was illegal under state law.
State law allows witnesses preparing to testify in court to take their oath by
laying a hand over "the Holy Scriptures," by saying "so help me God" without the
use of a religious book or by an affirmation using no religious symbols.
The group sought a court order declaring the statute unconstitutional or
clarifying that it was broad enough to allow the use of multiple religious
texts.
Though the judge stopped short of that, the ACLU and others supporting the
lawsuit still considered the ruling "a great victory."
"As of today, all people can use the holy text of their choice," said Seth
Cohen, an ACLU attorney who argued the case.
"We welcome this ruling as an expression of our nation's constitutional
commitment to religious diversity and tolerance," said Arsalan Iftikhar, legal
director for Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations.
The ACLU said six other states have similar laws that favor the Bible in
courtrooms: Arkansas, Delaware, Kansas, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and
Virginia.
In North Carolina, it is rare for someone taking an oath at one of the state's
108 court facilities to request an alternative to the Bible, said Dick Ellis, a
spokesman for the state Administrative Office of the Courts.
A trial court judge initially dismissed the ACLU's suit in December 2005, ruling
it was moot because there was no actual controversy at the time.
An appeals court panel allowed the case to go forward in January, after the ACLU
added Syidah Mateen as a plaintiff. In its decision, the appeals court
cited Mateen's claim that her request to place her hand on the Quran as a
witness in a domestic violence case was denied in 2003.
During a hearing this month, state attorneys asked Ridgeway to dismiss the case,
calling the complaint political.
The state has 30 days to appeal Thursday's ruling and is reviewing it, said
Noelle Talley, spokeswoman for the state attorney general.
|
