Worry over Shariah law in Idaho jeopardizes child support

BOISE, Idaho -- The U.S. has spent years leading negotiations toward an international treaty that would make it easier for single parents worldwide to collect child-support payments.

But families across the country could be stuck with the cumbersome existing system after legislators in a single state rejected the deal because, they said, it could allow Islamic law to influence American courts.

The move by Idaho threatens an effort involving dozens of nations that set out more than a decade ago to improve procedures that have made it difficult -- sometimes impossible -- for parents to get the money.

Idaho leaders now face pressure to reverse their decision and have called a special legislative session, which begins Monday and will cost taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars each day.

Experts and families around the U.S. are watching closely, especially those among the 150,000 active international child-support cases involving about $600 million annually.

Worries about the spread of Shariah have surfaced in several states in recent years, often resulting in proposals to restrict the use of foreign law in state courts.

Opponents dismiss these bills as anti-Islamic fear-mongering. They say Shariah never has trumped U.S. state or federal law.

Supporters, meanwhile, say the legislation protects states' rights in an increasingly globalized world.

Foreign law bans have been introduced this year in 17 states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Nine states have passed them, and a bill in Mississippi recently was signed into law.

Until now, the debate had been academic. But when nine lawmakers on an Idaho House panel last month killed a bill required as part of the state-by-state ratification process, it jeopardized the international effort as well as the state's entire child-support collection and payment system.

Idaho's special session will focus solely on legislation related to the treaty. The governor and others want to overcome concerns of opponents who say it could require the state to enforce rulings made in other nations under Islamic law.

"There are other countries listed in the treaty -- France, Belgium -- that have recognized Shariah courts as quasi-courts," Republican state Sen. Sheryl Nuxoll told the committee last month.

State and federal officials say such worry is baseless, because language in the treaty outlines states' rights to reject deals that do not uphold basic American-style standards of legal fairness.