Print
E-mail
Federal Court Permits AIG Bailout Challenge To Proceed
By JOE MURRAY, The Bulletin
An Establishment Clause lawsuit challenging AIG’s use of its bailout funds to support Islamic activities was given the green light by a Michigan federal judge Thursday when it survived a motion to dismiss filed by the Obama administration’s Justice Department.
The Thomas More Law Center’s case against Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and the Federal Reserve Board will move forward, as the judge reasoned that times of crisis do not permit the government to depart from the U.S. Constitution.
“In this case, the fact that AIG is largely a secular entity is not dispositive: The question in an as-applied challenge is not whether the entity is of a religious character, but how it spends its grant,” wrote Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff. “The circumstances of this case are historic and the pressure upon the government to navigate this financial crisis is unfathomable. Times of crisis, however, do not justify departure from the Constitution.”
The Law Center, which is a public interest law firm, filed the case on behalf former U.S. Marine Kevin Murray. The lawsuit challenged a portion of the “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008” (EESA) that appropriated $40 billion in federal dollars to fund and financially support the government’s majority ownership interest in AIG.
It is alleged a portion of the $40 billion is being used by AIG to fund Shariah-based Islamic religious activities. Specifically, AIG, a company the government owns an 80 percent share in, participates in Shariah-compliant financing which subjects certain financial activities, including investments, to the dictates of Islamic law and the Islamic religion.
“It is outrageous that AIG has been using taxpayer money to promote Islam and Shariah law, which potentially provides support for terrorist activities aimed at killing Americans,” said Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center.
“Shariah law is the same law championed by Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. It is the same law that prompted the 9/11 terrorist attacks on our soil that killed thousands of innocent Americans.”
The lawsuit says AIG, with the aid of taxpayer dollars, employs a “Shariah Supervisory Committee.” Also of concern is the religious-based tax Shariah-compliant financing levies to support those individuals who “struggle [jihad] for Allah.”
Some of the charities that are beneficiaries of the tax are connected to terrorist organizations hostile to the U.S. and U.S. interests.
Justice Department lawyers attempted to dismiss the case by arguing Mr. Murray did not have the proper legal standing to make his constitutional challenge. And even if Mr. Murray had standing, it was argued government funding of AIG activities did not violate the Establishment Clause. The Court disagreed.
“In this case, the United States government has a majority interest in AIG. AIG utilizes consolidated financing whereby all funds flow through a single port to support all of its activities, including Sharia-compliant financing,” Judge Zatkoff wrote.
The federal judge argued the government gave AIG taxpayer dollars “without restricting or tracking how this considerable sum of money is spent” and indicated evidence suggested some of the money was used to support Sharia-compliant financing. Such facts, in the judge’s opinion, constituted a viable case.
“These facts, taken together, raise a question of whether the government’s involvement with AIG has created the effect of promoting religion and sufficiently raise Plaintiff’s claim beyond the speculative level, warranting dismissal inappropriate at this stage in the proceedings,” he wrote.
Mr. Murray filed the lawsuit because he objects to government funding of Islamic beliefs and practices predicated upon Shariah law. He charges Shariah law is hostile to the Christian faith.
Joe Murray can be reached at jmurray@thebulletin.us
The Thomas More Law Center’s case against Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and the Federal Reserve Board will move forward, as the judge reasoned that times of crisis do not permit the government to depart from the U.S. Constitution.
“In this case, the fact that AIG is largely a secular entity is not dispositive: The question in an as-applied challenge is not whether the entity is of a religious character, but how it spends its grant,” wrote Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff. “The circumstances of this case are historic and the pressure upon the government to navigate this financial crisis is unfathomable. Times of crisis, however, do not justify departure from the Constitution.”
The Law Center, which is a public interest law firm, filed the case on behalf former U.S. Marine Kevin Murray. The lawsuit challenged a portion of the “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008” (EESA) that appropriated $40 billion in federal dollars to fund and financially support the government’s majority ownership interest in AIG.
It is alleged a portion of the $40 billion is being used by AIG to fund Shariah-based Islamic religious activities. Specifically, AIG, a company the government owns an 80 percent share in, participates in Shariah-compliant financing which subjects certain financial activities, including investments, to the dictates of Islamic law and the Islamic religion.
“It is outrageous that AIG has been using taxpayer money to promote Islam and Shariah law, which potentially provides support for terrorist activities aimed at killing Americans,” said Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center.
“Shariah law is the same law championed by Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. It is the same law that prompted the 9/11 terrorist attacks on our soil that killed thousands of innocent Americans.”
The lawsuit says AIG, with the aid of taxpayer dollars, employs a “Shariah Supervisory Committee.” Also of concern is the religious-based tax Shariah-compliant financing levies to support those individuals who “struggle [jihad] for Allah.”
Some of the charities that are beneficiaries of the tax are connected to terrorist organizations hostile to the U.S. and U.S. interests.
Justice Department lawyers attempted to dismiss the case by arguing Mr. Murray did not have the proper legal standing to make his constitutional challenge. And even if Mr. Murray had standing, it was argued government funding of AIG activities did not violate the Establishment Clause. The Court disagreed.
“In this case, the United States government has a majority interest in AIG. AIG utilizes consolidated financing whereby all funds flow through a single port to support all of its activities, including Sharia-compliant financing,” Judge Zatkoff wrote.
The federal judge argued the government gave AIG taxpayer dollars “without restricting or tracking how this considerable sum of money is spent” and indicated evidence suggested some of the money was used to support Sharia-compliant financing. Such facts, in the judge’s opinion, constituted a viable case.
“These facts, taken together, raise a question of whether the government’s involvement with AIG has created the effect of promoting religion and sufficiently raise Plaintiff’s claim beyond the speculative level, warranting dismissal inappropriate at this stage in the proceedings,” he wrote.
Mr. Murray filed the lawsuit because he objects to government funding of Islamic beliefs and practices predicated upon Shariah law. He charges Shariah law is hostile to the Christian faith.
Joe Murray can be reached at jmurray@thebulletin.us
 |
||
| Liberals, Conservatives Fight To Define Sotomayor |
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of thebulletin.us.
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
