Remember when I wrote that Tennessee's "Sharia" bill actually gives the state government the same kind of powers the federal government uses to cripple the finances of terrorist organizations? Well, it turns out that's exactly what Tennessee state Sen. Bill Ketron had in mind:
Ketron's bill "mirrors federal law," he said, referring to the Patriot Act, "to give our local and state law enforcement agencies more tools to act against those extremists who have declared jihads."
It's an attempt to restrict creation, operation and support of terrorist groups.
"It in no way restricts their freedom of religion or their way of worship," said Ketron who represents Marshall County.
That's exactly the problem. Attacking the finances of terrorist groups is one of those tasks for which "the states are separately incompetent." There are already federal laws on the books criminalizing material support for terrorism, the Tennessee bill criminalizes support for "sharia organizations," a vague and broad category that could easily encompass non-criminal behavior, notwithstanding the bill's weak exculpatory provision that the bill does not make illegal "the practice of Islam by its adherents." The bill states that "the knowing adherence to sharia and to foreign sharia authorities is prima facie evidence of an act in support of the overthrow of the United States government and the government of this state." A Muslim who prays five times a day is adhering to Sharia. Under the current language, this bill could make him a terrorist.
An Islamic community center in Murfreesboro recently had to fend off a lawsuit alleging that its supporters were trying to institute Sharia. Under this bill, the state attorney general could simply declare them a "sharia organization" and freeze their finances. Ironic, when you consider it's actually mosques in the state that have been subject to acts of terrorism, like the arson at a mosque in Nashville last August.
This is also why I compared the bill to Arizona's draconian SB 1070 immigration law. Defenders of that law likewise said that it "mirrored federal law," when in actuality it preempted federal law and replaced it with something much worse.