No Shari’a Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 5512
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-09-19: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2026-04-21T08:05:35Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The "No Shari'a Act" (H.R. 5512) aims to prevent U.S. courts from applying or enforcing Shari'a (Islamic law) or any foreign law when it conflicts with constitutional rights. It seeks to reaffirm the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law, ensuring that only American laws govern court decisions, particularly to protect vulnerable groups like women and children from potential coercion or unequal treatment.
Key Provisions
- Sense of Congress (Sec. 2): Expresses that the Constitution must remain supreme, foreign laws (including religious codes) cannot undermine it, and courts should not enforce them if they erode rights in areas like family law, contracts, and civil rights. It emphasizes protecting fundamental liberties while allowing voluntary personal religious practices.
- Findings and Purposes (Sec. 3): Congress finds that the Supremacy Clause (Article VI of the Constitution, which makes the Constitution the highest law) requires U.S. courts to prioritize American law over Shari'a or foreign systems. The purpose is to ban enforcement of such laws that infringe on rights, ensure courts use only U.S. federal and state laws, and promote nationwide clarity in protections.
- Definitions (Sec. 4):
- "Foreign law" includes any legal system from outside the U.S., such as religious laws used in place of U.S. law.
- "Court" covers federal, state, territorial courts, and arbitration panels if their decisions need court enforcement.
- "Fundamental rights" refer to Constitution-guaranteed protections like due process (fair legal procedures), equal protection (treating people fairly under the law), freedom of religion, speech, and rights in marriage, child custody, and property.
- Prohibition on Application of Shari'a (Sec. 5):
- Courts cannot enforce judgments, decrees, or arbitration decisions based partly or fully on Shari'a or foreign law if it violates any party's constitutional rights.
- Contract clauses selecting foreign law are valid only if enforcement does not breach rights.
- In family matters (e.g., marriage, divorce, child custody, adoption, inheritance), courts must reject foreign law if it conflicts with fundamental rights or public policy (widely accepted community standards).
- Rulemaking (Sec. 6): The U.S. Attorney General, working with the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, must create regulations and provide training to judges for consistent enforcement.
- Severability (Sec. 7): If any part of the Act is ruled invalid by a court, the rest remains in effect.
- Effective Date (Sec. 8): Takes effect 180 days after becoming law.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
This bill builds on the existing Supremacy Clause by creating explicit, nationwide rules against enforcing Shari'a or foreign law in U.S. courts when it violates constitutional rights. It introduces uniform standards to address cases where parties have previously sought to apply such laws in judicial or arbitration settings, particularly in family and contract disputes. Previously, some states had similar "foreign law bans," but this federal law would standardize and strengthen these protections across all jurisdictions, overriding any conflicting state practices.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The Department of Justice (via the Attorney General) and federal courts would need to develop and implement new regulations and training, increasing administrative workload but promoting consistency in legal proceedings.
- On Citizens: Individuals in legal disputes involving foreign law (e.g., international marriages or contracts) gain clearer protections against rulings that could undermine their rights, especially in sensitive areas like child custody or inheritance. It may limit personal choices in private agreements but safeguards vulnerable parties from unequal treatment.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, as the bill focuses on domestic courts and does not regulate foreign governments or international treaties. However, it could signal U.S. policy on religious laws, potentially affecting diplomatic discussions with countries where Shari'a is official law.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- U.S. Courts and Judges: Directly responsible for applying the prohibitions, requiring them to scrutinize foreign law elements in cases.
- Individuals and Families: Particularly those in disputes involving marriage, divorce, custody, or contracts with foreign law clauses; includes immigrants, Muslim Americans practicing Shari'a voluntarily, and vulnerable groups like women and children who might face coercion.
- Legal Professionals and Arbitrators: Must adapt to new rules in drafting contracts and handling international cases.
- Religious Communities: Muslim groups or others using religious laws in private matters, as the bill allows voluntary practice but bars court enforcement of conflicting elements.
- Federal Agencies: The Attorney General's office and court administrators for rulemaking and education.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal Implications: Reinforces the Supremacy Clause by providing a clear framework to reject foreign law in courts, reducing ambiguity in mixed-jurisdiction cases. The severability clause ensures the law's core survives partial invalidation, and the 180-day delay allows preparation time.
- Constitutional Implications: Aligns with protections under the First Amendment (freedom of religion) by permitting personal religious observance while preventing court-imposed violations of other rights like equal protection (14th Amendment). However, it could raise questions if perceived as targeting specific religions, potentially inviting challenges under the Establishment Clause (prohibiting government favoritism toward religion).
- Political Implications: The bill reflects congressional intent to prioritize constitutional supremacy amid debates on cultural integration and rights protection, but it may spark discussions on religious freedom versus safeguarding public policy, without altering broader immigration or foreign policy frameworks.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (31)
Rep. Self, Keith [R-TX-3], Rep. Roy, Chip [R-TX-21], Rep. Gill, Brandon [R-TX-26], Rep. Messmer, Mark B. [R-IN-8], Rep. McGuire, John J. [R-VA-5], Rep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4], Rep. Moore, Barry [R-AL-1], Rep. Mills, Cory [R-FL-7], Rep. Patronis, Jimmy [R-FL-1], Rep. Hamadeh, Abraham J. [R-AZ-8], Rep. Taylor, David J. [R-OH-2], Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5], Rep. Nehls, Troy E. [R-TX-22], Rep. Fischbach, Michelle [R-MN-7], Rep. Haridopolos, Mike [R-FL-8], Rep. Biggs, Sheri [R-SC-3], Rep. Van Duyne, Beth [R-TX-24], Rep. Harris, Mark [R-NC-8], Rep. Davidson, Warren [R-OH-8], Rep. Harris, Andy [R-MD-1], Rep. Harshbarger, Diana [R-TN-1], Rep. Luna, Anna Paulina [R-FL-13], Rep. Hern, Kevin [R-OK-1], Rep. Allen, Rick W. [R-GA-12], Rep. Donalds, Byron [R-FL-19], Rep. Perry, Scott [R-PA-10], Rep. Van Orden, Derrick [R-WI-3], Rep. Rulli, Michael A. [R-OH-6], Rep. Fulcher, Russ [R-ID-1], Rep. Baumgartner, Michael [R-WA-5], Rep. Smith, Adrian [R-NE-3]
Recent Actions
- 2025-09-19: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2025-09-19: Introduced in House
- 2025-09-19: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- No Shari’a Act — issued 2025-09-19 — PDF (5 pages)