The article examines the ways Islamic leaders have adapted to conditions in Britain, France, and the United States by taking one problem—how a Muslim woman can obtain a religious divorce—and identifying contrasts across those three countries. It emphasizes two contrasts among the three countries: the degree of residential concentration of Muslims and the social effects such concentration may have, and the legal legitimacy of religion in civil courts. Muslim leaders have crafted institutions accordingly: in Britain, shariah councils emerging from tight-knit communities and regarded by jurists as relatively benign; in France, Islamic leaders constrained to emphasize the Islamic legitimacy of civil institutions; and in the United States, leaders developing contractual instruments in response to relatively favorable judicial reactions.
BanoS. (2004). Complexity, difference and “Muslim personal law”: Rethinking the relationship between Shariah councils and South Asian Muslim women in Britain (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Warwick, Department of Law, Coventry, UK.
2.
BasedowJ.YassariN. (Eds.). (2004). Iranian family and succession laws and their application in German courts. Beiträge zum ausländischen und internationalen Privatrecht, 43. Tubingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck.
3.
BowenJ. (2007). Why the French don’t like headscarves. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
BowenJ. (2008). Europe. In RippinA. (Ed.), The Muslim world (pp. 118-130). New York, NY: Routledge.
BowenJ. (2009b). Can Islam be French?Pluralism and pragmatism in a secularist state. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7.
BowenJ. (2011). How could English courts recognize Shariah?University of St. Thomas Law Journal, 7(3): 411-435.
8.
BrubakerR. (1992). Citizenship and nationhood in France and Germany. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9.
FetzerJ.SoperJ. C. (2005). Muslims and the state in Britain, France and Germany. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
FournierP. (2010). Flirting with God in Western secular courts: Mahr in the West. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 24, 67-94.
11.
FulchironH. (2006). “Ne répudiez point . . .”: Pour une interpretation raisonée des arrêts du 17 février 2004. [“Do not divorce . . .” for a reasoned reading of the decisions of February 17, 2004”]. Revue internationale de droit compare, 1,7-26.
12.
GardnerK. (1995). Global migrants, local lives: Travel and transformation in rural Bangladesh. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
13.
HallaqW. B. (2009). Sharî’a: Theory, practice, transformations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14.
KastoryanoR. (2002). Negotiating identities: States and immigrants in France and Germany. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15.
LaurenceJ. (2012). The Emancipation of Europe’s Muslims: The State’s Role in Minority Integration. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16.
LeonardK. I. (2003). Muslims in the United States: The state of research. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
17.
LewisP. (2002). Islamic Britain: Religion, politics, and identity among British Muslims (2nd ed.). London, UK: Palgrave.
18.
MacMasterN. (1997). Colonial migrants and racism: Algerians in France, 1900–62. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
19.
MaussenM. (2007). Constructing mosques, negotiating Islam and cultural diversity in the Netherlands and France (1900–2004) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Amsterdam, Netherlands.
NielsenJ. S. (1999). Towards a European Islam. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
22.
23.
PearlD.MenskiW. (1998). Muslim family law (3rd ed.). London, UK: Sweet & Maxwell.
24.
QuraishiA.Syeed-MillerN. (2004). No altars: A survey of Islamic family law in the United States. In WelchmanL. (Ed.), Women’s rights and Islamic family law (pp. 177-229). London, UK: Zed.
25.
ReddingJ. (2004). Constitutionalizing Islam: Theory and Pakistan. Virginia Journal of International Law, 44, 759.
26.
RoheM. (2004). The formation of a European Shari`a. In MalikJ. (Ed.), Muslims in Europe: From the margin to the center (pp. 161-184). LIT Verlag, Münster, Germany.
27.
SchiffauerW. (2000). Die Gottesmänner: Türkische Islamisten in Deutschland [The Men of God: Turkish Islamists in Germany]. Frankfurt-am-Main, Germany: Erstausgabe.
28.
SchönwälderK. (2007). Residential segregation and the integration of immigrants: Britain, the Netherlands and Sweden (WZB Discussion Paper SP IV 2007-602).
29.
ShawA. (2000). Kinship and continuity: Pakistani families in Britain. London, UK: Routledge.
30.
SimonJ. (Ed.). (2002). L’immigration algérienne en France [The Algerian Immigration to France]. Paris, France: L’Harmattan.
31.
SoysalY. N. (1994). Limits of citizenship: Migrants and postnational membership in Europe. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
32.
StowasserB. F. (2002). The Turks in Germany: From sojourners to citizens. In HaddadY. Y. (Ed.), Muslims in the West: From sojourners to citizens (pp. 52-71). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
33.
TuckerJ. E. (2008). Women, family and gender in Islamic law. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
WelchmanL. (2004). Women’s rights and family law: Perspectives on reform. London, UK: Zed.
36.
WilliamsR. (2008, February 7). Civil and religious law in England: A religious perspectiveLecture presented at the Royal Courts of Justice, London. Available at http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/1575
37.
WilsonW. J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged: The Inner city, the underclass, and public policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
