Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, Founder and President of American Islamic Forum for Democracy, Rebukes Judge's Dismissal of FGM Charges

USA - English

• USA - English

LOS ANGELES, Dec. 1, 2018 /PRNewswire-PRWeb/ -- In a disappointing and unforeseen turn, a federal judge has dismissed female genital mutilation (FGM) charges against Michigan physicians because of his belief that the 1996 federal law was unconstitutional. The Detroit Free Press states that, "In a major blow to the federal government, a judge in Detroit has declared America's female genital mutilation law unconstitutional, thereby dismissing the key charges against two Michigan doctors and six others accused of subjecting at least nine minor girls to the cutting procedure in the nation's first FGM case."

The American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) has been following the case closely since charges were first announced in April 2017 when it announced, "The American Islamic Forum for Democracy, a Muslim-led organization whose founding principles include gender equality, welcomes the news that Jumana Nagarwala, a Detroit-based physician, has been arrested for allegedly carrying out female genital mutilation (FGM) against girls here in the United States."

AIFD President, M. Zuhdi Jasser, has written extensively on the case including a comprehensive piece for the Gatestone Institute in June 2017, titled: "Female Genital Mutilation: American Muslim Physician Says Stop Defending the Abuse of Girls and Women."

As expected, Jasser was not pleased with the news on the case. In reaction to Judge Friedman's dismissal of the FGM charges, he writes, "Judge Friedman's premature ruling is beyond egregious. It is inhuman and un-American. The judge essentially just signaled to doctors like Dr. Nagarwala that they can seek refuge in the U.S. federal system for their crimes against the humanity of young girls."

Jasser goes on to state that although he understands the mental gymnastics of the federalist ruling, he believes that there appeared to be many other ways justice could have been served for the victims, and the case hasn't even been tried yet.

"This is a landmark case. The judge cannot just wrap himself conveniently in a few words of acknowledgement of the horrors of FGM," elaborates Jasser, "this case was breaking new ground and it's not clear to anyone that the feds made their case at all yet let alone fully, as to why they had jurisdiction and why the federal law was in fact constitutional."

The case, which saw seven to nine-year-old girls being trafficked between states and then operated on by licensed physicians, received attention from law enforcement after probable cause was found in federal books. Jasser believes that it requires a suspension of disbelief for anyone to even entertain an argument that FGM based in cross-state trafficking could not fit into many aspects of federal jurisdiction, especially given the '96 law.

"If this case is about the hope of finding any justice for the young girls," Jasser concludes, "there must have been countless ways for the judge to hear the case and then send a clear and unmistakable message about FGM regarding many counts against the perpetrators while yet leaving some room in the decision for some teaching points on "federalism"."

SOURCE American Islamic Forum for Democracy