New editions of the State Legislative Tracker and The Policy Tracker available now!

Alabama Foreign Laws in Court, Amendment 1 (2014)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Amendment 1
Flag of Alabama.png
Click here for the latest news on U.S. ballot measures
Quick stats
Type:Constitutional amendment
Constitution:Alabama Constitution
Referred by:Alabama State Legislature
Topic:State Judiciary
Status:Approved Approveda
2014 measures
Seal of Alabama.png
July 15
Amendment 1 Approveda
November 4
Amendment 1 Approveda
Amendment 2 Approveda
Amendment 3 Approveda
Amendment 4 Approveda
Amendment 5 Approveda
EndorsementsFull text
The Alabama Foreign Laws in Court, Amendment 1 was on the November 4, 2014 ballot in Alabama as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved. The amendment prevented Alabama courts from recognizing foreign and other laws that violate either Alabama's public policy or the rights of the state's citizens. It was primarily sponsored in the Alabama Legislature by Sen. Gerald Allen (R-21), where it was known as Senate Bill 4.[1][2]

Election results

Below are the official, certified election results:

Alabama Amendment 1
Approveda Yes 696,141 72.33%

Election results via: Alabama Secretary of State

Text of measure

Ballot title

The official ballot title of this measure appeared as follows:[3]

Statewide Amendment 1

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to prohibit the State of Alabama from giving full faith and credit to public acts, records, or judicial proceedings of another state that violate the public policy of the State of Alabama and to prohibit the application of foreign law in violation of rights guaranteed natural citizens by the United States and Alabama Constitutions, and the statutes, laws, and public policy thereof, but without application to business entities. (Proposed by Act 2013-269)

Yes ( )
No ( )

Ballot summary

The full ballot summary was as follows:[5]

Amendment 1 proposes to add “the American and Alabama Laws for Alabama Courts Amendment” to the State Constitution. Amendment 1 would prohibit courts and other legal authorities from applying foreign law if doing so would violate rights guaranteed to citizens of Alabama. This Amendment does not apply to the laws of other states but applies only to “any law, rule, or legal code or system used outside of the United States or by any other people, group or culture different from the people of the United States or the State of Alabama.”

Amendment 1 would apply to contracts by individual citizens, but would not apply to business entities or to persons who willingly choose to give up the rights protected by this Amendment.

If Amendment1 IS PASSED, Alabama will have in place a Constitutional provision that says Alabama citizens will not be subject to foreign law if application of the foreign law would violate Alabama law or result in a violation of their rights.

If Amendment1 IS DEFEATED, courts and legal authorities may choose to refuse to apply foreign law if the foreign law would result in a violation of Alabama law and/or deprive a citizen of his or her rights, even though there is no statute or Constitutional Amendment requiring them to do so.

There is no cost for this Constitutional Amendment.

The measure will have no impact on taxes.

The Constitutional authority for passage of this Amendment is set forth in Sections 284, 285, and 287 of the State Constitution. These sections outline the way a constitutional amendment may be put to the people of the State for a vote. [4]

Constitutional changes

See also: Alabama Foreign Laws in Court, Amendment 1 (2014), constitutional text changes

The measure added Amendment 884 to the Alabama Constitution. The full text of the constitutional changes can be read here.


During the 2011 state legislative session, Sen. Gerald Allen proposed the Alabama "Sharia Law Amendment," which did not make the November 2012 ballot. This measure sought to prohibit state courts from implementing Islamic Sharia law when making judicial decisions. In SB 4, Sen. Allen did not use any language that specifically referred to Sharia law.[1]

OK 2010 measure

Oklahoma became the first state to attempt to keep international or other non-state or federal laws out of court decisions in 2010 with State Question 755. On January 10, 2012, the 10th Circuit Court Of Appeals struck down the measure, stating that the proposal violated the United States Constitution. Despite being approved by the voters, an injunction on the measure plus the final overturn prevented the law from taking effect.[6]

Sharia law

Sharia refers to codes of practices that some, but not all, Muslims follow. According to the Council on Foreign Relations,

[Sharia] guides all aspects of Muslim life, including daily routines, familial and religious obligations, and financial dealings. It is derived primarily from the Quran and the Sunna—the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed. Precedents and analogy applied by Muslim scholars are used to address new issues. The consensus of the Muslim community also plays a role in defining this theological manual.[4]

—Council on Foreign Relations[7]

Sharia was developed after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, the founder of Islam whose revelations are recorded in the Qur'an, Islam's holy scripture. In an attempt to emulate the life of the prophet, followers tried to replicate his lifestyle and practices as much as possible. The collection of the oral traditions regarding Muhammad's life and behavior is known as the hadith. What exactly this looked like varied as different schools of Islam developed with distinct practices. Sharia also developed differently in these places as each group placed differing value and weight on parts of the Qur'an, hadith, religious scholars and communal agreement.[7][8]

While several countries have incorporated aspects of one or more schools of thought regarding sharia, individual adherents do not usually stick to one school in regards to their personal lives.[7]

For more information about sharia, its role in the governments of foreign countries and more, please see the additional reading section.


Sen. Allen was the primary sponsor of SB 4.

SB 4 "Yes" votes

The following members of the Alabama Legislature voted in favor of putting SB 4 on the ballot:[9][10]

Note: A yes vote on SB 4 merely referred the question to voters and did not necessarily mean these legislators approved of the stipulations laid out in Amendment 1.




  • Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA)[11]


SB 4 "No" votes

The following members of the Alabama Legislature voted against putting SB 4 on the ballot:[9][10]

Note: A no vote on SB 4 meant that a legislator did not want to refer the question to voters and did not necessarily mean these legislators disapproved of the stipulations laid out in Amendment 1.




  • Rev. Richard L. Killmer


In a guest column on, Rev. Richard L. Killmer alleged that the intent of this amendment was the same as the one Sen. Allen proposed in 2011, which was to ban Sharia Law. However, Rev. Killmer argued that such a law is unnecessary due to the fact that "the U.S. Constitution already states that U.S. law takes precedence over any foreign law, including the unspoken target of this amendment, Shariah or Islamic law." He further alleged that SB 4 was simply looking for a way to discriminate against Muslims. He stated:[12]

So why is this happening? Some people have decided to harass Muslims and are finding ways to discriminate against them. Unless the American public, including the people of Alabama, takes a stand, the injustices of yesterday will unfold again before our eyes. [...] The sovereignty of the U.S. judicial system will not be undermined by imaginary support for Shariah law, but there is a risk that it will be undermined by legislation that discriminates.[4]

—Rev. Richard L. Killmer[12]

Media editorial positions

See also: Endorsements of Alabama ballot measures, 2014


  • The Dothan Eagle said,
Passage of this amendment would prohibit the application of foreign law to any Alabamian.

It’s a reactionary move in opposition to Sharia law. However, any foreign law is already trumped by U.S. law.

Our recommendation: Vote no.[4]

—Dothan Eagle[13]

  • The Montgomery Advertiser said,
Amendments 1, 3 and 5 represent the worst sort of political game playing and should be roundly rejected by voters.

Amendment 1 prohibits the application of foreign law in Alabama courts and prohibits the state from giving full faith and credit to the laws of other states that conflict with public policy in Alabama.

Of course, Alabama courts are not employing foreign laws now and they aren't going to start. Nor are they recognizing the laws of other states that differ from our own. To suggest that our courts are somehow going to be governed by sharia law or any other foreign set of statutes is absurd and insulting to voters.[4]

—Montgomery Advertiser[14]

  • The Gadsden Times said,
This amendment would prohibit something that’s not happening now. It would prevent state courts from applying foreign law that would violate an individual’s constitutional right. Given the makeup of Alabama’s top courts, such an action is unlikely to happen. The amendment is overkill and not needed.[4]

—Gadsden Times[15]

Path to the ballot

See also: Amending the Alabama Constitution
Alabama Constitution
Seal of Alabama.png

According to Article 18 of the Alabama Constitution, both houses of the Alabama State Legislature were required to pass the bill by a three-fifths or 60 percent vote, in order to send it to the statewide election ballot. Since the amendment was approved by a simple majority of the electorate, it became part of the constitution.

SB 4 was read for the first time in the Senate and referred to the Judiciary Committee on February 5, 2013. On March 20, 2013, the measure passed the Senate by a vote of 22 to 6. The House approved the amendment two months later on May 20, 2013, by a vote of 75 to 6.[16] The House heard no arguments on the measure prior to its passage.[17]

Senate vote

March 20, 2013 Senate vote

Alabama SB 4 Senate vote
Approveda Yes 22 78.57%

House vote

May 20, 2013 House vote

Alabama SB 4 House vote
Approveda Yes 75 92.59%

Similar measures

See also

Suggest a link

External links

Additional reading

Sharia links


  1. 1.0 1.1, "Ballot Question Could Add Foreign Law Protections," May 21, 2013
  2. Freedom Legislation Forum, "Ballot Measure: Alabama to ban use of foreign law in state courts," May 23, 2013
  3. Alabama Secretary of State, "PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO APPEAR ON THE BALLOT STATEWIDE," accessed September 8, 2014
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributed to the original source.
  5. Alabama State Legislature Fair Ballot Commission, "2013-2014 Statewide Constitutional Amendments Ballot Statements," accessed September 8, 2014
  6. Think Progress, "BREAKING: 10th Circuit Court Of Appeals Declares Oklahoma’s Sharia Ban Unconstitutional," January 10, 2012
  7. 7.0 7.1 7.2 Council on Foreign Relations, "Backgrounders: Islam: Governing Under Sharia," July 25, 2014
  8. BBC, "Religions: Sharia," September 3, 2009
  9. 9.0 9.1, "Alabama House Vote on SB 4 (May 20, 2013)," accessed August 7, 2014
  10. 10.0 10.1, "Alabama Senate Vote on SB 4 (Mar 20, 2013)," accessed August 7, 2014
  11. HSLDA, "Senate Bill 4: Prohibits the Application of Foreign Law in Violation of Citizens' Constitutional Rights," accessed July 11, 2014
  12. 12.0 12.1, "Proposed amendment banning "foreign law" is really an effort to harass Muslims (Guest column)," June 17, 2013
  13. Dothan Eagle, "Our view: Most amendment ballot measures are unnecessary," November 2, 2014
  14. Montgomery Advertiser, "Only two amendments deserve passing," October 17, 2014
  15. Gadsden Times, "Our view: Only one amendment should pass," November 1, 2014
  16. Open States, "Alabama 2013 Regular Session SB4," accessed July 11, 2014
  17. Associated Press, "Ballot Question Could Add Foreign Law Protections," May 21, 2013