But they are voluntary, so no biggie.
"Breitbart Texas asked what happens when there is a conflict
between Sharia law and Texas law. El-badawi said most of the time, the
laws are in agreement. When pushed further he admitted that, “we follow
Sharia law.” However, he explained, “If the parties are not satisfied
with the tribunal’s decision, they do not have to accept it and they can
take the matter to Texas civil courts.” He did not say what the social
ramifications of rejecting the “judge’s” decision would be."
"El-badawi restated several times that participation in the tribunal is
voluntary. However, he would not discuss what happens to someone who did
not follow their rulings."
To my great horror, there is one sentiment in this piece that I have to agree with:
"The website for
the Islamic Tribunal states, “The courts of the United States of America
are costly and consist of ineffective lawyers. Discontent with the
legal system leads many Muslims in America to postpone justice in this
world and opt for an audience on the Day of Judgment.”
If it's a choice though between costly and ineffective or sharia, I'd still stick with sclerotic and expensive.