A court in Minnesota has ruled that sharia law cannot override American law when it comes to estate inheritance. The fact that they even needed to make that judgment says something about the evolving nature of this country’s cultural landscape.
The case itself exemplifies the clash between American and sharia-based Islamic values. Hosameldin Ibrahim Imbabi, the brother of Nadir Ibrahim Ombabi, a Muslim taxi driver killed in an accident, claimed in court that he should inherit the bulk of the money awarded to his brother’s estate from a wrongful death lawsuit. He grounded his claim in Islamic law.
According to court filings, Imbabi “argued that the district court should apply Islamic law and, after payment of expenses from the settlement proceeds, distribute 25% of the proceeds to [Ombabi’s widow], 16.7% to Ombabi’s mother’s estate, and the remaining proceeds to Ombabi’s siblings, with the males to receive ‘twice the share of the female.’” He continued:
The principles of the private international law should have been applied from the beginning since the law of all parties (the decedent, his widow and decedent[‘s] next of kin) is the Islamic Law and they are all Muslims and follow the specifics of the religion.
But under state law, Ombabi’s widow, Nariman Sirag Elsayed Khalil, was actually entitled to the full amount of her late husband’s estate.
Here’s the precise wording spelled out in Minnesota state law:
[Any recovery] shall be for the exclusive benefit of the surviving spouse and next of kin, proportionate to the pecuniary loss severally suffered by the death.
As UCLA Law’s Eugene Volokh notes, “In this case, the court concluded that the wife was entitled to the entire amount, less expenses, because there was ‘no credible evidence to prove” that the other next of kin ‘experienced a pecuniary loss, or more importantly what that pecuniary loss is, because of Mr. Ombabi’s passing.’”
“The court concluded that the wife was entitled to the entire amount, less expenses, because there was ‘no credible evidence to prove” that the other next of kin ‘experienced a pecuniary loss, or more importantly what that pecuniary loss is, because of Mr. Ombabi’s passing.’”
Eugene Volokh
Quite simply, it didn’t matter that the couple were married under Sudanese Islamic law or that “all parties” adhered to Sharia. The court ruled that Imbabi wasn’t allowed to import patriarchal, anti-women laws into US court. Period.
“The principle is simple: American courts apply American law, including when an American law principle calls on American courts to enforce a foreign judgment, to apply foreign law or to follow terms in a contract or a will that deliberately track foreign or religious law,” affirms Volokh.