Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
History of anti-Sharia bills in US state legislatures since 2010
Executive summary
Anti‑Sharia measures have been a prominent state‑level phenomenon since about 2010: reporting and research groups count roughly 194–233 state bills introduced since 2010, with about 18–20 laws enacted in roughly 12–13 states (different counts come from UC Berkeley/Haas, the American Bar Association, and other monitors) [1] [2] [3]. The push began as a wave of “copy‑paste” model bills and ballot efforts in 2010–2011 and has been tracked by civil‑rights groups, academics, and investigative reporters as an ongoing movement with legal, political, and civil‑liberties consequences [4] [5] [6].
1. Origins and the 2010–2011 surge: how one controversy became many bills
The anti‑Sharia legislative movement coalesced after high‑profile controversies around 2010, spawning dozens of state proposals in 2010–2011; specialists trace the early spread to networks pushing model texts and to public debate over a proposed Muslim community center in Manhattan (the movement “started to gain traction in 2010”) [4] [7]. By the 2010 midterms Oklahoma placed a Sharia‑targeted constitutional amendment on the ballot (State Question 755), a touchstone that drove similar formulations elsewhere [6] [8].
2. Copy‑paste model bills and the actors behind them
Investigations show coordinated dissemination of model legislation — notably drafts tied to the “American Laws for American Courts” approach — which civil‑rights groups and reporters describe as copycat bills promoted by organizations such as the Center for Security Policy and allied activists [4] [5]. Proponents, including the model’s author, have argued the texts are religiously neutral, while critics say the language functions as a vehicle to single out Islam [4].
3. How many bills and how many laws?: competing tallies
Different authorities report different totals. UC Berkeley’s Haas Institute documented about 194 state proposals through 2016 and noted dozens became law in a dozen states [1]. More recent compilations from the American Bar Association’s Civil Rights & Social Justice section and other outlets report totals around 233 bills introduced since 2010 and roughly 20 enacted in 13 states [2] [3]. The discrepancies reflect variation in methodology (what counts as “anti‑Sharia” or “anti‑Muslim” legislation), timeframes, and updates to tracking databases [5] [1].
4. What these laws and proposals actually do — and legal problems they raise
Most measures fall into two patterns: (a) statutes or constitutional amendments explicitly naming “Sharia” or broadly banning foreign/international/religious law in state courts, and (b) bills framed to bar recognition of foreign or non‑U.S. legal principles [9] [10]. Civil‑liberties groups argue these laws are unnecessary (existing law already protects constitutional rights) and discriminatory; the ACLU and other litigants successfully challenged Oklahoma’s amendment on constitutional grounds, arguing it targeted a religious minority [8] [9].
5. The political purpose: lawmaking or agitation?
Observers — including the American Bar Association and the Haas Institute — say the legislative effort often functions less as neutral jurisprudence and more as a political instrument to mobilize fear about Muslims and foreign law, with timing spikes near election cycles and high visibility even where courts already reject Sharia‑based outcomes [2] [5] [7]. Supporters counter that some texts are intended to preserve constitutional primacy and prevent foreign legal norms from abrogating fundamental rights [4].
6. Scholarly and civil‑rights framing: Islamophobia and constitutional consequence
Academics have linked anti‑Sharia statutes to broader patterns of institutionalized Islamophobia and warned of constitutional harms: laws can stigmatize Muslim citizens and impede courts’ ability to respect valid international commitments consistent with constitutional values [11] [8]. The American Bar Association has opposed these bans as unnecessary and potentially harmful to the rule of law [9] [2].
7. What reporting highlights now, and limits of available accounts
Recent journalism and advocacy databases continue to track new bills and federal proposals inspired by state activity; for example, contemporary reporting shows renewed interest in national legislation and fresh state initiatives as late as 2024–2025 [12] [3]. Available sources do not mention a single authoritative, universally agreed‑upon count for every bill and every state through 2025; readers should expect different numbers depending on which research group’s definitions and cutoffs are used [1] [2].
Conclusion — what to watch next: tracking methodology matters. When you see headline totals (194, 217, 233, “over 230”), ask which database, which years, and which definitions are being used; the pattern of coordinated model bills, litigation, and civil‑liberties pushback is well documented even as exact counts vary across reputable trackers [4] [5] [2].