No Shari’a Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Tuberville, Tommy [R-AL]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Oct 15, 2025
Bottom line
The "No Shari'a Act" aims to legally reinforce the supremacy of the U.S. Constitution and state constitutions over foreign legal systems, particularly Shari'a, in American courts, citing concerns about constitutional rights.
What it actually does
This bill, the "No Shari'a Act," prohibits federal, state, and territorial courts, including arbitration tribunals whose decisions are subject to judicial enforcement, from applying or enforcing Shari'a or any other foreign law that violates constitutional rights. It specifically addresses contract provisions and family law matters, stipulating that foreign law cannot be applied if it conflicts with fundamental rights or public policy. The bill also directs the Attorney General to issue regulations and provide judicial education for its uniform application.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that the bill is a necessary measure to safeguard fundamental constitutional rights, such as due process, equal protection, and freedom of religion, against potential erosion by the application of foreign legal systems in U.S. courts. They contend that it provides clarity and certainty, ensuring that vulnerable populations, including women and children, are protected from unequal treatment that might arise under foreign laws. Proponents emphasize that the U.S. Constitution must remain the supreme law of the land, and this bill reaffirms that principle.
Opponents contend
Opponents argue that the bill is unnecessary and potentially discriminatory, as existing constitutional protections and legal precedents already prevent U.S. courts from enforcing any law, foreign or domestic, that violates constitutional rights. They contend that the bill may stigmatize specific religious communities, particularly Muslims, by explicitly naming Shari'a, and could be seen as an attempt to legislate against a religion rather than address a genuine legal problem. Critics also suggest it could lead to confusion or unintended consequences in areas like international contract law or the recognition of foreign judgments.
The bill is short and relatively easy to read, allowing a reader to quickly grasp its core intent and provisions.
Section 5(a)
General Prohibition on Application of Shari'a or Foreign Law
This section broadly prohibits any federal, state, or territorial court, including arbitration tribunals whose decisions are subject to judicial enforcement, from enforcing any judgment, decree, or arbitration decision that relies, in whole or in part, on Shari'a or any foreign law if that law violates the constitutional rights of any party. This establishes a clear boundary for what foreign legal principles can be applied in U.S. judicial contexts.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is crucial for explicitly protecting constitutional rights, especially for vulnerable individuals who might otherwise be subject to foreign legal systems that do not uphold U.S. standards of equality and due process. They contend it closes potential loopholes where foreign law could be inadvertently or intentionally applied to the detriment of individual liberties.
Critics contend
Opponents argue this provision is redundant, as U.S. courts already operate under the Supremacy Clause and existing legal principles that prevent the enforcement of any law, foreign or domestic, that violates constitutional rights. They suggest it could be interpreted as singling out specific religious laws, potentially fostering discrimination or misunderstanding.
Tradeoffs
The tension lies between affirming constitutional supremacy, which is broadly accepted, and the potential for the bill to be perceived as targeting specific religious groups or creating unnecessary legal hurdles for legitimate applications of foreign law (e.g., in international commerce) that do not violate rights.
Section 5(b)
Validity of Contract Provisions Choosing Foreign Law
This provision clarifies that a contract clause specifying the application of foreign law will generally be considered valid. However, it explicitly states that such a provision will not be enforced if its application would lead to a violation of constitutional rights. This balances the principle of contractual freedom with the paramount importance of constitutional protections.
Section 5(c)
Restrictions on Foreign Law in Family Law Matters
This section specifically addresses family law matters, including marriage, divorce, child custody, adoption, and inheritance. It mandates that no court shall apply or enforce foreign law in these areas if doing so would be inconsistent with fundamental rights or public policy. This highlights the particular sensitivity of family law to constitutional protections and societal norms.
Section 6
Attorney General Rulemaking and Judicial Education
This section directs the Attorney General of the United States, in consultation with the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, to issue regulations and provide judicial education. The purpose of these actions is to ensure the uniform application of the Act across all jurisdictions. This aims to standardize how courts interpret and implement the prohibition on foreign law.