Sorry, but in this case you would have to illustrate that 'institutionalized hypocrisy' is practiced by the majority of US Muslims to make a valid argument.
Dragging in an example of Saudi Arabian laws for example does not justify attributing similar attitudes to American Muslims.
to me the case of the mosque is clear cut. american law works inside america and the mosque is legal.
however, legal discrimination largely exists in muslim majority countries(dictatorships and democracies included) and if the Cairo declaration is the best one can hope for, its not going to end anytime soon.
since the discrimintory laws in muslim majority countries come directly from the tenets of the religion itself, US muslims(like all others) are going to get some flak for this hypocrisy. let me say why.
i see no obvious grounds to believe that US muslims are an outlier to the OIC consensus and reject all of the UNDHR(assuming US law upholds UNDHR) incompatible ideas that exist within islamic law. i think the burden to demonstrate that such rejection is in principle and not under coercion of US law lies with US muslims. (wide ranging statements rejecting punishments for apostacy and blasphemy would be a good start)
until such is demonstrated beyond doubt, the idea of US muslims as some kind of champions of the sanctity of western law is almost laughable.
i believe that there are lots of muslims who bat for entirely secular legal thought and reject the legal authority of religion, but they seem to be rather the minority given the average state of law and the guiding principles in the OIC.
so even though its not entirely justified, US muslims will continue to suffer from the very low 'Secular Quotient' of muslim majority countries in a manner of guilt by association until they can demonstrate otherwise.
PS: This is written with the assumption that you are a secular thinker.