A judge ruled that construction must stop on a Murfreesboro TN mosque because not enough notice was given of the planning meeting where building permits were issued.
Rutherford County does not specify what is considered adequate notice and the meeting was publicized in local papers.
A public notice about the 2010 Planning Commission meeting, in which no public hearing was required over the mosque’s site plan, was published in the twice-weekly Murfreesboro Post, which has a contract to handle Rutherford County’s legal advertising.But that's not good enough, because it didn't appear on the group's website or cable channel (as if residents of Murfreesboro would have gone to those outlets).
In a case that captured national and international media attention, Corlew determined that the county’s legal notice in the Murfreesboro Post to announce the time, date and meeting location without an agenda didn’t go far enough to inform residents about the mosque issue. The ruling noted the county didn’t mention the meeting in advance on its website or cable TV channel.
But the county is not taking steps to halt construction of the mosque.
A group of residents filed a lawusit to stop the construction and the plaintiff's attorney has promised more litigation, claiming that continuing construction in violation of the order to stop work, is 'Sharia Law'.
"This is Sharia law,"Joe Brandon, plaintiffs’ attorney, said of construction continuing without a valid permit. "They’re thumbing their nose at the state of Tennessee."So yes, continuing construction despite a nebulous ruling on a legal technicality is an example of 'Sharia Law'. Clearly part of this attorney's legal education included elements of Sharia Law as he is able to refer to aspects of it.
He sai id he would file further litigation if the work did not stop.
“There will be more litigation,” plaintiffs’ attorney Joe Brandon said while giving an interview in his office. “We are going to give the county an opportunity to do what’s right. Their time frame is on a short fuse.”The Islamic center followed the proper steps in notifying residents of the planning meeting, which does not give neighbors the opportunity to speak out challenging the Planning Commission's vote. Nevertheless, according to them, the rules should have been changed to favor opponents to allow them the right to vote down the approval.
"There should have been public notice. People should have been allowed to come in and express or at least understand what was going on," Golcyznky said.But altering the rules to give them the advantage and an opportunity to spew their bigotry, that's not 'Sharia Law'.
The mosque attorneys have argued for their constitutional rights,
"American Muslim constitutional rights should not be diminished merely because anti-Muslim bigots are able to manufacture a controversy about what would otherwise be normal religious activities," said CAIR attorney Gadeir Abbas.but according to opponents, Islam is not a 'real religion' (even though it somehow manages to have Sharia Law) and therefore does not deserve to have a mosque of its own built.
Mosque opponents have fought construction for two years, arguing that Islam is not a real religion deserving of First Amendment protections and that the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro has terrorist ties.