My son lives in the US. He married a Pakistani American girl in 2009. Both the families elders were at the ceremony. The nikah and other wedding rituals were performed as per the Islamic law. The mahr agreed between me and the bride’s father was US Dollars 10,000. Later it was registered in the US court according to their laws. I and my wife are living in Kuwait. Few days back my son talked to her mother that he cannot live with his wife and is thinking to divorce her. (It is important to tell you that bride’s whole family is living in USA for the last 25 years. We have our two daughters and a son in the USA. My daughters are studying in a university on student visas and both of them are unmarried. So the problem is none of our family’s elder lives in the USA)
As per the US laws both will get half of what they have, and according to the islamic laws my son should pay whole mahr and all the things she brought from her parents. I want to know which way we go either US LAWS OR ISLAMIC LAWS.
Answer
The Meher is a gift that the husband owes to the wife and is due at the time of marriage. This debt needs to be paid off as soon as possible (in case the husband has not touched his wife then the Meher will be half of what was fixed at the start of the marriage). The law of the land (US) is not in conflict with this therefore is not even relevant here.
At the same time the couple resides in the US. Like any residents (and in particular as Muslims) they are bound by a contract, that is, the laws and regulations of the country of the residents and the state they are in.
Now, if the couple agree that they will only observe the Sharia rules with regard to the assets (meaning the wife will take all that belongs to her including any gifts from the husband) then obviously there is no problem with this and I don’t think this is against any laws in the US, assuming they are both willing to do this.
However if one of the parties decides to take advantage of the US law with regard to dividing of assets after divorce, then for the reason stated earlier, the other party has no choice but to obey the law and to fulfill his/her obligations accordingly.
In other words, the law of the land should be seen as a superseding law which is put into force if and when one of the parties wants to take advantage of it. There can be a potential question here, that is, is the husband or the wife religiously allowed to take advantage of this law (i.e. the law of the land). In my view the answer is positive. This is because we are dealing with the issue in a non-Muslim country where both parties knew (or should have known) the law of the country with regard to this issue. This is unless they had formally agreed before or after the marriage to only observe the Sharia law in the case of divorce. From your question I understand this was not the case.
I again emphasize that the issue of Meher in this case has nothing to do with the law of land and the Meher should be paid any way.
All the above is from the perspective of law (state or religious). From morals perspective, it is expected from a good Muslim to think about the other party in any financial issue and to deal with the situation with understanding, kindness and wisdom.
