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.
Has Sadiq Khan ever publicly endorsed or rejected Sharia Law?
Executive Summary
Sadiq Khan has not publicly endorsed Sharia law; instead he and his office have repeatedly rejected claims that he advocates imposing Sharia in London, calling such assertions “bigoted,” “racist” or “appalling” in responses to former US President Donald Trump’s remarks in September 2025. Official statements and reporting underline that Sharia councils in the UK exist as voluntary, non‑binding religious arbitration and that “Sharia law forms no part of the law of England and Wales,” a legal reality cited alongside Khan’s rebuttals [1] [2] [3]. The record shows rejection of the allegation rather than any endorsement, and political allies and ministers publicly supported Khan’s denial in the immediate aftermath [4] [5].
1. How the allegation surfaced and Khan’s forceful rebuttal — a political flashpoint
Donald Trump publicly claimed London would be governed by Sharia law, triggering an immediate and visible political controversy in late September 2025; Khan’s office characterised those claims as “appalling and bigoted” and refused to dignify them with extended response, framing the comments as an Islamophobic political attack rather than a factual dispute [4] [3]. Reporting from that period highlights rapid defensive messaging from Khan and allies: the mayor denied any effort to introduce Sharia legal structures into London governance, and government figures emphasised that British secular law applies across the UK. This exchange animated international headlines and domestic political debate because the allegation touched on immigration, integration and national identity themes, areas where opponents can weaponise fear of religious law to score political points [1] [5].
2. Legal context: why ‘Sharia law’ is a misnomer in UK governance debates
Independent analyses at the time stressed that religious arbitration bodies, including Sharia councils, operate but do not create binding public law in England and Wales, and that British law supersedes religious rulings; commentators invoked the formal legal principle that “Sharia law forms no part of the law of England and Wales” to refute any claim about replacing civil law [1] [2]. This legal baseline undercuts the literal plausibility of Trump's assertion and the rhetorical danger it posed: conflating community mediation with formal legal authority misleads publics about how the justice system functions. Reporting noted the distinction between private, voluntary religious dispute resolution and state law, a point used by Khan’s office and allied ministers to counter the narrative that an elected mayor could or would impose a parallel, binding legal system [2].
3. Media framing and cross‑party reactions — contrasting agendas at play
Coverage displayed partisan and international angles: US political rhetoric framed the claim as part of a broader critique of metropolitan multicultural leadership, while UK responses emphasised legal fact and social cohesion. Khan’s dismissal of the charge as racist and Islamophobic aligned with allies in government who defended both the legality and pluralism of British society, and outlets reflected that defensive posture; opponents amplified the rhetorical shock value of the Sharia allegation [4] [5]. The rapid involvement of Cabinet ministers and mayoral spokespersons indicated the claim’s potency; defenders mobilised institutional and legal facts to neutralise the political narrative, while critics leveraged cultural anxieties about religion and law to press their case.
4. What the record does — and does not — show about Khan’s own statements
Public records and the contemporaneous reporting cited in these analyses show no instance of Khan endorsing Sharia law for London or framing it as a policy objective; instead, his responses were rebuttals of the allegation and condemnations of the rhetoric used against him [1] [3]. The sourced analyses consistently state that Khan “has not publicly endorsed Sharia Law” and had his office counter claims by citing the supremacy of British law. What is absent from the record is any documented policy proposal or public statement by Khan advocating for Sharia to be incorporated into municipal governance; the available evidence records denials and contextual legal clarifications rather than any endorsement [1] [2].
5. Bottom line and remaining caveats for readers seeking the full picture
The factual bottom line is clear: Sadiq Khan has publicly rejected the notion he seeks to impose Sharia law in London and has characterised such allegations as bigoted; UK law also prevents Sharia from replacing English and Welsh law. That combined legal and political rebuttal formed the core response narrative in late September 2025 [4] [2]. Caveats remain for those tracking broader debates: the presence of voluntary Sharia councils in the UK continues to generate legitimate policy discussion about arbitration, community governance, and gender rights, and those debates are separate from the false claim that an elected mayor is installing Sharia as state law. Readers should separate sensational political claims from statutory legal reality when judging such episodes [1] [5].