Liberals like to say a lot of silly stuff like free abortions and rent control are their rights, but they have no authority and can be laughed off. Someone with authority, a federal judge, has ruled that mutilating the genitals of young girls is a Constitutional right. It’s unclear which amendment grants this right, but a judge in Michigan handed down a decision stating that a ban on female genital mutilation (FGM) is unconstitutional.
Female genital mutilation is a gruesome practice of certain Muslim communities, and it is exactly what the name would indicate. Without getting into the specifics, it is a pseudo-surgical procedure that removes or hinders a female’s ability to derive pleasure from sexual intercourse.
Congress passed the Female Genital Mutilation Act of 1996, which bans performing this on anyone under the age of 18. Now, thanks to U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman, Muslims are free to perform this practice.
The Detroit News reports that Dr. Jumana Nagarwala was accused of mutilating the genitals of 9 young girls as part of a religious rite practiced by a sect of Muslim Indians. Because she freely admitted to doing this, her lawyer mounted a defense challenging the legality of the Congressional ban on FGM. As dumb as this sounds, it worked.
Judge Friedman found banning FGM was unconstitutional and dismissed most of the serious charges against Nagarwala. The reason Judge Friedman came to this conclusion is as bizarre as the ruling itself.
“There is nothing commercial or economic about FGM. (Female genital mutilation) is not part of a larger market and it has no demonstrated effect on interstate commerce. The Commerce Clause does not permit Congress to regulate a crime of this nature,” wrote Friedman in his opinion.
Huh? So because FGM isn’t a commercial product, it’s okay to horribly and permanently disfigure the genitals of young girls?
This ruling makes no sense because Congress wasn’t trying to regulate the commerce of FGM, they just made it illegal. They didn’t impose a tax on genital mutilation, and they didn’t make a licensing requirement to practice it. They straight up said this is something that no one is permitted to do.
In the Roe v. Wade decision, the Supreme Court legalized abortion citing a right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which is ridiculous. In this FGM ruling, the judge appears to be legalizing it by citing the commerce clause of Section I, Article 8 of the US Constitution. This clause allows Congress to ban illicit drugs, but not apparently female genital mutilation.
Regardless of whether this ruling is solid or not, it seems like there are plenty of other laws covering FGM that prosecutors could get Nagarwala on. There is no specific law against puncturing someone’s testicles with a knitting needle, and yet doing so is still highly illegal. The same has to be true of slicing up someone’s vagina. Assault, disfigurement, bodily harm, terrorism. Look around, there has to be plenty of different ways to charge this crime.
27 states have laws against FGM. In fact, the Nagarwala case inspired Michigan to pass one as well. Unfortunately, the law was passed after Nagarwala was already charged, so the state can’t go after her with it. Unlike this other craziness, a ban on ex post facto laws actually is part of the US Constitution.
It’s a mystery how some judges can sleep at night knowing they let guilty rapists and murderers off on legal technicalities. Judge Friedman, however, has to look at himself in the mirror with the knowledge that he legalized and normalized the frightening practice of female genital mutilation. Then again, he’s probably a liberal and those people have no problem with their inherent awfulness.