Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Awad v. Ziriax Case Brief

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma2010Docket #394221
754 F. Supp. 2d 1298 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125612 2010 WL 4814077 Constitutional Law Federal Courts Civil Procedure

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A federal court enjoined an Oklahoma constitutional amendment that forbade state courts from considering “Sharia Law.” The court found the amendment likely violated the First Amendment’s Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses by singling out and expressing disapproval of a particular religion, Islam.

Legal Significance: This case exemplifies how the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses prevent a state from enacting laws that specifically target and disapprove of a particular religion. It affirms that such laws are not neutral and will likely fail constitutional scrutiny under the First Amendment.

Awad v. Ziriax Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Following a popular vote, Oklahoma passed State Question 755, the “Save Our State Amendment,” which amended the state constitution. The amendment prohibited Oklahoma courts from considering or using “international law or Sharia Law” when making judicial decisions. The text specifically and uniquely singled out Sharia Law, providing that courts could not look to the law of another U.S. state if that law “include[s] Sharia Law.” The plaintiff, Muneer Awad, a Muslim American citizen residing in Oklahoma, filed suit seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent the state from certifying the election results. Awad argued the amendment violated his First Amendment rights by officially condemning his religion and conveying a message that he was an outsider in the political community. He also asserted a concrete injury, claiming the amendment would prevent an Oklahoma court from probating his last will and testament, which contained provisions based on Islamic teachings regarding charitable giving. During the hearing, the state’s counsel conceded that he was unaware of any instance where an Oklahoma court had applied Sharia Law, indicating the amendment was intended as a preventative measure.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a state constitutional amendment that expressly forbids state courts from considering “Sharia Law” likely violate the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment?

Yes. A state constitutional amendment that specifically forbids courts from considering “Sharia Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in rep

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does a state constitutional amendment that expressly forbids state courts from considering “Sharia Law” likely violate the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment?

Conclusion

This decision serves as a direct application of core First Amendment principles, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nos

Legal Rule

A government action violates the Establishment Clause if its purpose or effect Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Legal Analysis

The court analyzed the plaintiff's First Amendment claims to determine his likelihood Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • The court enjoined Oklahoma from certifying a constitutional amendment that banned
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Ex

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

A lawyer is a person who writes a 10,000-word document and calls it a 'brief'.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+