Fact check: Which states passed anti-Sharia measures around 2010 and what was the legal outcome?

1. What voters approved and what the ballot actually said — the political headline that ignited litigation

Oklahoma’s 2010 State Question 755, often called the “Save Our State Amendment,” explicitly forbade state courts from considering Sharia law and restricted reliance on international law, and it passed with about 70% voter approval in November 2010. Supporters framed the amendment as a protective measure to prevent foreign or religious laws from influencing Oklahoma courts, while advocates emphasized voter will and state sovereignty. The amendment’s text and the campaign around it made the measure legally distinct from ordinary statutory proposals because it sought to amend the state constitution, which magnified both its symbolic importance and the constitutional scrutiny it would receive once challenged in federal court ^{[1] [5]}.

2. The immediate judicial response — district court’s block and constitutional reasoning

Within weeks of the November 2010 vote, a federal district judge entered a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the amendment, concluding that its language and context conveyed a governmental message of disapproval of Islam and therefore likely violated the Establishment Clause. Courts focused on both the amendment’s text and the political environment surrounding it to assess whether a reasonable observer would view the state’s action as targeting a particular faith. The district court’s analysis emphasized the constitutional principle that the government cannot adopt policies that single out or disparage a religion, and this reasoning formed the basis for denying Oklahoma the ability to implement the popularly approved amendment ^[4].

3. Appeals and affirmation — the Tenth Circuit’s confirmation of unconstitutionality

The legal fight moved to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the district court’s injunction and ruled that Oklahoma could not implement the anti‑Sharia constitutional amendment. The appellate panel found that the amendment’s purpose and likely effect were to disfavor the Islamic faith, thereby violating the Establishment Clause. The Tenth Circuit’s decision, rendered in early 2012, confirmed that even popular majoritarian votes cannot override constitutional protections against religious discrimination, and it effectively ended Oklahoma’s attempt to enshrine an anti‑Sharia provision into state constitutional law ^{[2] [3]}.

4. Competing narratives — proponents’ intent vs. courts’ interpretation

Those who supported State Question 755 argued it was a neutral safeguard preventing foreign or religious laws from influencing state courts. Proponents emphasized the electorate’s clear preference and framed the amendment as a defensive legal posture. In contrast, courts and opponents argued that the amendment’s drafting and campaign messaging made it clear the amendment targeted Islam specifically, transmitting a governmental endorsement of religious disfavor. This split between proponents’ stated intent and the courts’ interpretation of purpose and effect underlies the constitutional analysis and explains why a democratically approved measure nonetheless failed judicial review ^{[5] [4]}.

5. Legal outcome, lasting implications, and scope of the record

The consolidated judicial record shows a clear outcome: Oklahoma’s anti‑Sharia amendment was approved at the ballot box but blocked and struck down in federal court, with the Tenth Circuit confirming the unconstitutionality and preventing implementation. The sources in this record consistently report the same result across contemporaneous 2010–2012 rulings and later summaries. The documentation here focuses on Oklahoma; while other states considered or proposed measures around that period, the materials provided for this analysis substantiate and document only Oklahoma’s vote and its subsequent judicial defeat, underscoring that constitutional limits can override popular state amendments when they discriminate against a religion ^{[1] [5] [3]}.