The illustrious David Yerushalmi and Robert Muise of the American Freedom Law Center, who have won numerous AFDI free speech lawsuits in our fight against Leftist and Islamic authoritarianism, are tireless warriors in the fight against shariah in America. Here they pen a response to the Harvard Law Professor.
Dear Professor Dershowitz:
We write as attorneys who have, like you, litigated in support of fundamental constitutional freedoms, in particular one of the most foundational: religious liberty. According to published reports, you will be offering a freedom of religion defense for three individuals in Michigan recently charged with violating federal law prohibiting Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). We respectfully disagree that this barbaric practice must be permitted under the First Amendment or the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
To begin, the U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that the right of free exercise does not relieve individuals of the obligation to comply with a valid or neutral law of general applicability on the ground that the law proscribes conduct that is required by his or her religious practice. The laws banning FGM are such laws.
Nonetheless, even if laws banning FGM might not be considered neutral laws of general applicability, that does not necessarily mean that the government cannot proscribe this brutal practice. Indeed, this is a situation where it is more likely than not that the government would satisfy the highest level of scrutiny. That is, a law banning this barbaric practice would be in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and the least restrictive means of furthering that interest.
With this as a background, there is, as you know, case law that bars in this country behavior that some religions consider sacred. For example, laws barring polygamy and the religious use of peyote have been upheld in America. We can find no basis for believing that a federal statute or a state law designed to protect young girls from having their genitalia involuntarily and permanently disfigured would be considered unconstitutional or in violation of RFRA or any state law counterpart to RFRA. That is especially true when, in addition to the life-long denial of sexual pleasure such a procedure imposes, the short- and long-term medical problems frequently associated with it are factored in.
We also believe that it is simply physiologically inaccurate to portray the mutilation of female genitals as akin to male circumcision, and therefore permissible. In fact, such mutilation is more akin to male castration than it is to the removal of a baby boy’s foreskin.
Finally, although various Islamic communities believe that Sharia law either permits female genital mutilation, condones it and/or makes it obligatory, author Nonie Darwish – a former Muslim whose mother was subjected to FGM in her native Egypt – notes that the justification is strategic, not religious. Ms. Darwish observes that by mutilating a woman, and thus denying her the ability to experience sexual pleasure, the authorities of Islam render her less likely to feel an attachment to her husband and thus less likely to object when he is called to jihad.
For all these reasons, we expect that the federal judiciary will properly reject claims that there is a protected religious right to FGM.
Robert J. Muise, Esq. David Yerushalmi, Esq.
Co-Founder and Senior Counsel Co-Founder and Senior Counsel
For Immediate Release
June 9, 2017
Religious Liberty Does Not Legitimate Female Genital Mutilation
Two Prominent Freedom of Religion Litigators Issue Open Letter to Alan Dershowitz, Challenge Idea that F.G.M. is Constitutionally Protected
Washington, D.C. – Two of the most effective advocates in American jurisprudence on behalf of constitutional religious liberty protections, David Yeruslami, Esq. and Robert Muise, Esq. of the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC), today weighed in on a momentous question: Do those who believe they must, in the practice of their faith, mutilate the genitals of young girls, have a right to do so in the United States?
Messrs. Yerushalmi and Muise argued forcefully that religious freedom does not negate prohibitions on female genital mutilation (FGM) at the federal level and in twenty-four states in an open letter to another distinguished litigator, Professor Alan Dershowitz, released today. Mr. Dershowitz has recently been enlisted to help in the defense of three individuals charged with violating such laws in Michigan.
In their letter, the AFLC leaders explained that the government has a “compelling interest” in protecting females in this country from FGM. According to the Centers for Disease Control, there are approximately half-a-million women and girls in this country who have either already been subjected to such mutilation or are at risk of it in the future. In their open letter, Messrs. Yerushalmi and Muise stated that:
“We can find no basis for believing that a federal statute or a state law designed to protect young girls from having their genitalia involuntarily and permanently disfigured would be considered unconstitutional or in violation of Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) or any state law counterpart to RFRA. That is especially true when, in addition to the life-long denial of sexual pleasure such a procedure imposes, the short- and long-term medical problems frequently associated with it are factored in.”
The Truth Must be Told
Your contribution supports independent journalism
Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.
Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.
Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.
Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.