(Natural News) Federal judges are human beings, obviously, and since humans are imperfect creatures they are prone to error.
Throughout our history, federal courts and the Supreme Courts have made monumental mistakes in issuing rulings on a range of issues including upholding slavery as a ‘property right’ and overturning 50 state laws banning the murder of babies in the womb.
This week, federal judges have again erred and not in small ways. One judge in California has barred POTUS Donald Trump’s executive order changing asylum rules ahead of the arrival of thousands of migrants in caravans — authority he has as president under national security and national emergency statues, according to The National Sentinel.
Meanwhile, on Tuesday another federal just — this one in Michigan — ruled that the Islamic practice of female genital mutilation is legal and a constitutionally-protected practice.
As reported by the Detroit Free Press:
In a major blow to the federal government, a judge in Detroit has declared America’s female genital mutilation law unconstitutional, thereby dismissing the key charges against two Michigan doctors and six others accused of subjecting at least nine minor girls to the cutting procedure in the nation’s first FGM case.
The historic case involves minor girls from Michigan, Illinois and Minnesota, including some who cried, screamed and bled during the procedure and one who was given Valium ground in liquid Tylenol to keep her calm, court records show.
U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman also dismissed charges against three mothers involved in the case. Two Minnesota mothers, prosecutors said, actually tricked their daughters, who were seven years old, into believing they were traveling to Detroit for a ‘girls’ weekend.’ Instead, they were taken to a clinic in Livonia and had their genitals cut as part of the hard-line Islamic procedure. (Related: Female genital mutilation threatens 500K American girls as families adhere to cultural tradition, shipping children abroad for deadly procedure.)
In his ruling, Friedman wrote that “as despicable as this practice may be,” Congress had no authority to pass a law 22 years ago criminalizing the procedure, claiming “federalism” — that states, not the federal government, had the power to regulate such procedures. At present, 27 states do outlaw it — and that includes the state of Michigan, where the FGM procedures occurred.
What’s coming next will be far worse
All of the defendants, the Detroit Free Press reported, belong to the Indian Muslim sect Dawoodi Bohra, which has a mosque in the city. “The sect practices female circumcision and believes it is a religious rite of passage that involves only a minor ‘nick,’” the paper said.
Defendants argued that “Congress lacked the authority to enact” an FGM criminalization statute, “thus the female genital mutilation charges must be dismissed.” It’s not clear yet if the Justice Department will appeal.
In an earlier report. the Detroit Free Press said defendants were claiming their right to perform FGM on minor children is a religious freedom issue protected by the First Amendment.
“It is hard for me to imagine any court accepting the religious freedom defense given the harm that’s being dealt in this case,” First Amendment expert Erwin Chemerinsky, a leading constitutional law scholar, told the paper before the trial, framing it as a “losing argument.”
“You don’t have the right to impose harm on others in practicing your religion,” he continued.
Apparently, you do, according to Friedman — and some Left-wing Democrats. And if his ruling stands, that means it is likely that state laws criminalizing the procedure will be targeted next. Though Friedman framed his decision as a matter of ‘federalism,’ if such laws are said to violate the First Amendment on the federal level, then they violate the First Amendment on the state level as well, since the Constitution is supreme.
The ruling is madness for several reasons including what it may portend: If it stands, what’s going to be challenged next — laws against murder by groups who claim a “religious right” to human sacrifice?
Read more about how there should be more health freedom for all at HealthFreedom.news.