Obama Nominates Nation’s First Muslim Federal Judge

qureshi-compressedWASHINGTON — Barack Obama has nominated a Muslim attorney to the federal court circuit, who if approved, would be the first Islamic judge in American history.

Abid Qureshi serves in Washington, D.C. at the law firm Latham & Watkins LLP, where he specializes in cases involving the False Claims Act, health care fraud and securities violations. A graduate of Cornell University and Harvard Law School, Qureshi has been a member of the District of Columbia Bar Association’s Legal Ethics Committee for the past year.

He has twice partnered with the group Muslim Advocates to defend Islamic rights in court.

“When two Muslim comedians successfully sued for the right to post their humorous advertisements about their religion in the New York subway, Qureshi represented them,” the Washington Post reports.

Quereshi also wrote a legal brief in defense of a Muslim man who had his laptop seized by customs officials at Dulles International Airport.

“He obviously has an interest in these issues because of his own faith,” Muslim Advocates Director Farhana Khera told the outlet. “He’s a very sharp legal mind, and he has a deep commitment to not only pro bono work, but I think to fairness and justice for people of all backgrounds.”

On Tuesday, the White House issued a press release advising that Qureshi had been nominated to sit on the bench of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

  • Connect with Christian News

“I am pleased to nominate Mr. Qureshi to serve on the United States District Court bench,” Obama said in a statement. “I am confident he will serve the American people with integrity and a steadfast commitment to justice.”

The announcement was applauded by Islamic groups.

“The nomination of Abid Qureshi to fill a seat on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia sends a message of inclusion that is welcomed by the American Muslim community and by all Americans who value diversity and mutual respect at a time when some seek division and discord,” CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad remarked in a statement.

“If confirmed, Qureshi will join the hundreds of thousands of American Muslims serving their fellow citizens and the nation,” he said.

But others expressed concern, including Andrew Bieszad of Shoebat.com.

“This Muslim being nominated, Abid Qureshi, is a Pakistani with a history of arguing pro-Muslim cases in court,” he said in a blog post this week. “It is no surprise why Obama picked him for this position- because his sympathies towards Islam would become the deciding factor in his judicial rulings.”

“Even if this judge’s background is spotless and patriotism unquestionable, this appointment bodes ill for the future. The Obama administration, and Hillary Clinton, deny that jihad terror has anything to do with Islam,” also said Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch. “How will they be able to vet potential judicial appointees who are Muslim for sympathies to a jihad they don’t admit exists, much less Shariah supremacism and more?”

Qureshi’s nomination is now in the hands of Congress for approval.

Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has ChristianNews.net been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Despite Facebook's recent algorithm changes, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational revenue, we continue to strive to bring you the news without compromise and to keep Christ in focus. If you have benefited from our news coverage, would you please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed? May Christ continue to be exalted through this work!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • David Fisher

    Another in the long line of historic firsts Obama’s presidency has produced: first female Fed chair, the first gay Army secretary, the first black man and black woman to serve as attorney general, the first Latina on the Supreme Court, the first transgender White House staffer, the first director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy to be in recovery. Obama is making an American government that looks more and more like America.

  • DevilsAdvocate

    “How will they be able to vet potential judicial appointees who are
    Muslim for sympathies to a jihad they don’t admit exists, much less
    Shariah supremacism and more?”

    I imagine it’s hard to get anywhere in the American legal system if you base your judgements on any form of scripture. Besides, do they “vet” judicial appointees who are Christian, of any degree of faith, for whether or not they’d try to introduce biblical law?

    • Leslie

      Except the fact that Islam is an ideology not strictly a religion. Christianity is a religion only not a form of law and societal living that you can be prosecuted by the Christian church. So if you blaspheme Mohammad like you do Christianity you could end up being fined. Like the hate speech in the UK. This is a bad idea and the way they have taken over previously majority Christian societies before as well as secular societies like France. Remember “The future will not belong to people who blaspheme the name of Mohammad.” –Barack Obama

      • SFBruce

        You might want to review the first five books of your Bible, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Jews call this the Torah, which is Hebrew for law. Perhaps you don’t know this, but when Obama said the words you attribute to him, he was talking about terrorists, who Obama thinks blasphemes Mohammad when they kill innocents.

        • Leslie

          Yeah no. Leviticus was the Law given to the Jews through Moses by G_d. Jesus came to fulfill the law. The law is to be followed exactly so that the Jews could strive to obtain perfection needed to get into paradise because they cannot without being absolutely sinless in G_d’s eyes. Since man cannot achieve perfection, only G_d can, Jesus had to come as Messiah to fulfill the law so we are no longer under the law if we believe in him. He is our intercessory with G_d. So perhaps you should read the whole thing as a package deal and don’t cherry pick for convenience.

          • renee

            Well. No offence. But when you say “Fulfill the law”. Bad interpretation. Continue reading Matt 5:17.
            The Torah still stands. Heaven & Earth are still here. Even the Disciples lived and preached the Torah & the Prophets. The Gospel wasn’t even written until years later. So what did they Preach…The Torah…which means instruction. Yahshua “Jesus” is the Word or Torah made flesh. Not one jot or Tittle will by no means be removed until ALL THINGS BE FULLFILLED…which they’re not yet. All through the scriptures. Old & New “Renewed covenant” it speaks of the Torah & Prophets!
            Blessings 🙂

          • Leslie

            No offense Taken Renee and yep I know it means instruction. I guess….everybody has their own interpretation depending on their viewpoint and religion. Why then did G_d tell Peter to go in and eat unclean food with the unclean Gentiles? G_d asks why he would call the things unclean that He had cleansed? You can interpret that as food or humans, still the same meaning. There are two different things… laws in Leviticus that the Jews have for every facet of society and commands/commandments of G_d. Christianity doesn’t require animal sacrifices either, the Jews hope to begin that tradition again when the Third Temple is built. thanks for the response though.

  • james blue

    No religious test.

    Any judge who rules by ANY faith over the law of the land is subject to removal. .

  • Philip Vaden

    Yet, our 19 trillion dollar indebtedness still remains. Perhaps with all these “firsts” we will resolve this debt matter also.

    • Grace Kim Kwon

      No worries. America has the priceless vast land that produces food for the entire world.

  • QUESTION: Who’s to blame for this?

    ANSWER: Well, Obama and those who voted him into office, of course. But don’t overlook Obama could have never been voted into office if not for the constitutional framers’ Christian test ban in Article 6 by which biblical qualifications were also eliminated, and there would be no Muslims to hold any position in government if the framers hadn’t replaced the First Commandment with the First Amendment.

    CLUE: There were no openly practicing Muslims, no Mosques, no Sharia, and no Islamic terrorism in 17th-century Colonial America whose governments of, by, and for God were established upon Yahweh’s moral law, beginning with the First Commandment:

    “…When the 18th-century founders replaced the First Commandment (found intact in some 17th-century Colonial Constitutions) with the First Amendment, America was transformed from a predominantly monotheistic Christian nation (a united nation under one God, Yahweh) into arguably the most polytheistic nation to exist (a divided nation under many gods, including Islam’s Allah).

    “It’s one thing to allow for individual freedom of conscience and private choice of gods, something impossible to legislate for or against. It’s another matter altogether for government to enable any and all religions to proliferate through the land and evangelize our posterity to false gods. This is what the First Amendment legitimizes. It is an unequivocal violation of the First Commandment and the polar opposite of the following First Commandment statute:

    ‘[Y]e shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves. For thou shall worship no other god: for Yahweh, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: Lest thou … go a whoring after their gods….’ (Exodus 34:13-15)….”

    For more, see blog article “National Religious Freedom Day aka Celebrating the Founders’ Violation of the First Commandment.” Click on my picture, then our website. Go to our Blog and search on title.

    Then find out how much you REALLY know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the left-hand sidebar and receive a complimentary copy of a book that EXAMINES the Constitution by the Bible.

    • The Skeptical Chymist

      You are correct, the First Amendment is in direct contravention of the First Commandment. I’m glad that the First Amendment reigns supreme in America, so all will have the freedom to follow their conscience. Freedom of religion was not routinely practiced in the colonies, as Baptists and Quakers in colonial Massachusetts could certainly tell you.

      • Thank you for responding.

        It would seem you more interested in allegiance to finite fickle man’s traditions (Matthew 15:6-9) than our infinite God and Creator’s perfect law and altogether righteous judgments (Psalm 19:7-11). Fair enough. That’s your choice. Mine is to submit to the only sovereign (1 Timothy 6:15).

        • DevilsAdvocate

          Unfortunately, there’s no indication that “our infinite God and Creator’s perfect law and altogether righteous judgments” are anything other than “finite fickle man’s traditions” – particularly when different people come to different conclusions about them.

          Personally, I’d rather follow the ideals of a man who can support his claim with reason and rationality, and doesn’t claim them to be anything more than that, than the ideals of a man who claims God gave him these ideas, yet can neither provide proof for the notion that they are from God, nor even explain why they should be followed other than that God made them.

          • Thanks for demonstrating the inspiration and veracity of the Bible, especially 1 Corinthians 2:12-14.

          • DevilsAdvocate

            You might want to pick a better example of “inspiration and veracity.” You can say some variation of that, about just about anything, and it would be true, because just about everything is found foolish by someone. The thing is, sometimes they things they call foolishness, actually are foolishness.

            That the writers of the bible predicted that someone would call them out on what they’d written, hardly demonstrates “inspiration.” After all, the Quran says something similar – is it also “inspired and true?”

    • TheKingOfRhye

      Maybe it’s a minor point compared to the rest, but there was a Muslim, Keith Ellison, elected to the House of Representatives before Obama was in office, so it’s not just him who is to “blame”…not that I feel having Muslims in government positions is something that warrants looking for someone to blame anyway.

      • DevilsAdvocate

        Keith Ellison wrote a book about being the first Muslim in Congress. I need to read it.

  • ron

    Study the history of the USA and you will find that the early colonists made a covenant with God to make this nation a christian nation and for it to endure down the ages. No support of isam or the pervert mohammad should be tolerated here. If obama and the muslims don’t like this, then they are free to move to nations of that persuation. Now I know that you will have to research this apart from the public school books of today.

    • Rick Derris

      I think the founders would be very surprised to read that, considering John Adams specifically stated in the Treaty of Tripoli:

      ARTICLE 11.

      As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

      There’s also Article VI, Clause 3 of the Constitution which states:

      “but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

      • DonQuavius

        But it DOES NOT mean you can’t ask normal vetting questions that a Muslim could NOT POSSIBLY PASS.

        • Rick Derris

          Well, you’re using caps. That means that you couldn’t possibly be wrong.

          • DonQuavius

            Don’t be a cnt

          • Rick Derris

            Mighty harsh language for a Christian news site!

    • Barb

      The early colonists created, in what is now Massachusetts, a Puritan theocracy. When the US became independent and adopted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, it adopted a different path, including the first amendment which provides for no religious test by government.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    The Muslim population is a blessing to all godless secular nations. Anything is better than monopoly reign of Western Sodomism on Planet Earth for the benefit of the Westerners themselves. Children need some normal world to live in, and the Muslims need freedom to receive the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Lord Himself protects Israel.

  • Rick Derris

    “But others expressed concern, including Andrew Bieszad of Shoebat.Com.”

    To which I say, who is Andrew Bieszad, and why should I care?

  • helpful55

    An attorney in private practice gets to go right to the fed appeal court bench?