STILLWATER, Okla. — A federal appeals court has upheld an injunction blocking a state constitution amendment to ban judicial consideration of Sharia or other international law.

The “Save Our State Amendment” was approved by 70 percent of voters in the November 2010 election. Shortly afterward, Oklahoma resident Muneer Awad — executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in the state — sued to block the State Election Board from certifying the results, a step necessary for the amendment to go into effect.

Among the claims in the lawsuit, Awad said the amendment would stigmatize Muslims, foster excessive entanglement between the government and his religion and prevent a court from being able to probate his last will and testament, which contains references to Sharia law.

The U.S. District Court judge for Oklahoma’s Western District approved the injunction, and the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver issued an opinion Tuesday agreeing with the legality of the injunction and saying Awad had the right to challenge the amendment’s constitutionality.

The opinion also said that those appealing the injunction hadn’t satisfied legal standards and Awad had a strong chance of winning his case during a trial.

“Appellants do not identify any actual problem the challenged amendment seeks to solve,” the ruling said. “Indeed, they admitted at the preliminary injunction hearing that they did not know of even a single instance where an Oklahoma court had applied Sharia law ... let alone that such applications ... had resulted in concrete problems in Oklahoma.”

Sen. Anthony Sykes co-authored the resolution that placed the amendment on the ballot, and the Moore Republican issued a release Tuesday condemning the court’s decision.

“The issue raised by this constitutional amendment is very simple — you are either for Sharia law or you are against it,” he said.

Rep. Cory Williams, D-Stillwater, voted against creating the ballot question and spoke out against the measure before it was passed. Williams said he thought Sykes’ statement vastly oversimplified the issue and ignored or didn’t understand the legal implications of a measure he authored.

“There’s never been a constitutional question that can be answered in one sentence,” Williams said of Sykes’ statement.

The Stillwater lawmaker, an attorney, said the amendment addressed a nonexistent problem and that courts are already required to only consider state and federal law when deciding cases.

“At the end of the day, it did exactly what I thought it would do, which is nothing other than cost the state thousands in legal fees to defend from something that was already protected against in the Bill of Rights, U.S. Constitution and the Oklahoma Constitution,” Williams said.

The second half of the amendment “forbids courts from considering or using international law,” which was defined in the ballot question as including “countries, states and tribes” and coming from “international agreements, as well as treaties.”

Williams said the vague wording could interfere with the state’s agreements with Oklahoma tribes that are considered sovereign states, or it could impede agreements between Oklahoma and international companies. He cited Devon Energy’s announcement earlier this week that it had sold energy plays to a Chinese company for $2.2 billion.

“I’m sure international law was involved in that, and a lot of it benefited a remarkable Oklahoma company,” Williams said.

Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt said Tuesday that he would continue to defend the case. The suit will go back to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, where a judge will determine whether the amendment is constitutional. Williams said he expects the judge to rule the amendment unconstitutional — for a number of reason, but he also expects lawmakers to try to run similar ballot questions in the future to bring out voters.

“(It) is sad, because we had so many real problems to address in the state of Oklahoma,” Williams said. “We have kids waiting on lists for disability services, and they’ve been there for seven years. That’s a real problem. We have underfunded classrooms that are growing in classroom size every year. ... That’s a real problem.

“There’s no real threat, no real issue, but it plays to somebody’s emotional core, thereby helping someone get elected and someone defeated,” he said.

Opponents used Williams’ opposition to the amendment during his 2010 reelection bid, which he said distorted his stance on the issue.

Williams said he is hopeful that as similar ballot initiatives come up, voters will research and determine whether a measure is a “scare tactic” or if it addresses an issue.

“Unfortunately, I think our public believed that if their representatives and senators put this on the ballot, they must be addressing an immediate issue, and that wasn’t the case at all,” Williams said. “I think their trust was placed accurately and betrayed terribly.”