TOPEKA — The Senate passed and sent the governor a bill that would outlaw the use of foreign legal codes in Kansas courts, a bill broadly written but particularly aimed at Islamic “Sharia” law.
The decision, which sends the bill to the governor’s desk, came after a lengthy and at times emotional debate.
The final vote was a lopsided 33-4, but had been closer on early procedural votes to try to send the bill back to committee.
Opponents of the law, including two Senators who signed the committee report to bring it to the Senate floor, argued that it is intolerant and unnecessary.
Premium content for only $0.99
For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today.
Sen. Tim Owens, R-Overland Park and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, opened the debate by apologizing for putting the Senate in position of having to vote on the bill.
“This is one where I made some mistakes; the first one was signing the conference report,” he said. “I believe this bill is unconstitutional (and) intolerant.”
Emphasizing that he is himself a Christian, Owens said “I think this bill will set Kansas out as a place not to go if you believe any other way than particularly a very small religious right perspective This country is based on freedom. And it isn’t ‘You can only be free if you think like me.’”
Proponents fired back that the bill protects the constitutions of Kansas and the United States and would prevent the use of foreign law to take away fundamental rights that are enjoyed in American courts.
“We don’t have any intolerance in this bill,” said Ty Masterson, R-Andover. “Nobody’s being stripped of their freedom of religion.”
Sen. Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, argued that Sharia law itself is what’s intolerant.
“I find Sharia law to take away all the rights of women,” Wagle said. “They stone women to death in countries that follow Sharia law, they (women) have no rights in court In this great country of ours and in the state of Kansas, women have equal rights.”
The proponents of the bill noted several times that Sharia was not specifically named in the bill and that it’s applicable to all foreign laws and legal systems.
But in an impassioned speech, Sen. Chris Steineger, R-Kansas City, said he was originally approached about the bill in January. He said the original pitch wasn’t about protecting the Constitution, but that Muslims were trying to use Sharia law to take over the United States and had to be stopped.
“I thought that was quite ludicrous at the time and I still do,” he said. “This (bill) doesn’t say Sharia law, but that’s how it was marketed back in January and all session long, and I have all the e-mails to prove it.”