Texas firebrand Rep. Chip Roy is leading a new Republican push to deport Sharia-law followers from the United States and crack down on radical groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood.
“America is facing an existential threat — the spread of Sharia Law,” Roy warned in a blistering statement. “From Texas to every state in the union, instances of Sharia Law adherents have threatened the American way of life, seeking to replace our legal system and Constitution with an incompatible ideology that diminishes the rights of women, children, and individuals of different faiths.”
Roy, who’s also running for Texas attorney general, said Europe’s experience with radical Islamist enclaves should serve as a warning to the U.S.
“Europe should be a wakeup call to America, showing what the spread of Sharia law looks like — the erosion of the West,” Roy said. “America’s immigration system must be fortified to counter the importation of Sharia adherents — the preservation of our constitutional republic and its people depend on it.”
The measure would direct top federal officials — including the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security and the Attorney General — to “deny any immigration benefit, visa, immigration relief, or admission to the United States to any alien who adheres to Sharia law.”
Congressman Chip Roy (R) speaks during House Judiciary Committee field hearing on New York City violent crimes at Javits Federal Building in New York City on April 17, 2023
It also mandates that any foreign national found to be a Sharia-law adherent “shall have any immigration benefit, immigration relief, or visa revoked, be considered inadmissible or deportable, and shall be removed from the United States.”
Those who lie about their adherence to Sharia law would face the same punishment, according to the bill.
Roy’s measure has quickly gained traction among House conservatives. Original cosponsors include Reps. Randy Fine of Florida, Tim Burchett of Tennessee, and Keith Self of Texas.
Roy also introduced the No Tax-Exemptions for Terror Act, legislation that would eliminate the tax-exempt status for extremist groups with close ties to terrorist organizations, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Brotherhood.
“It is absurd that the U.S. has provided organizations with ties to terrorism tax-exempt status in the U.S. – resulting in the American people inadvertently subsidizing terror against themselves. It is ridiculous, and we should have ended this long ago,” Roy said earlier this month.
The Supreme Court delivered a strong and necessary rebuke to judicial overreach this week, siding with the Trump administration in its battle to uphold fiscal responsibility during the government shutdown.
In a move that protected the separation of powers, the High Court temporarily blocked a lower court’s outrageous attempt to force the Trump administration to pay full Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits despite the absence of appropriated funds.
This was not just a legal victory—it was a constitutional one. President Donald Trump’s administration correctly argued that it cannot spend what Congress has not authorized, and the Court agreed.
At issue was a Rhode Island judge’s demand that the administration raid limited contingency funds to provide full SNAP benefits in the middle of a government shutdown that Democrats have prolonged.
That judge’s order would have set a dangerous precedent: allowing the judiciary to force the executive branch to fund entitlements beyond what Congress appropriates. Trump’s team rightly challenged it.
The administration stood firm. It refused to play into Democrat theatrics and declared that SNAP would be funded based on what legally exists—not what progressive judges or left-wing activists wish for.
This is what real leadership looks like. Trump’s America First agenda does not bend the knee to judicial activism or budgetary blackmail.
Despite liberal outrage, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson issued an administrative stay on the lower court’s order—confirming that the administration has the right to appeal and pause unlawful mandates.
The Supreme Court’s move ensures that unelected judges cannot usurp Congress’s power of the purse by forcing emergency expenditures that have no basis in law.
For weeks, Democrats have weaponized government shutdown politics, using essential services like SNAP as political hostages to demand concessions on unrelated spending.
The Trump administration has offered commonsense solutions. Fund critical programs through proper channels, reopen government, and stop holding the American people hostage.
Instead, left-wing courts tried to shame the administration into unlawfully raiding contingency funds. That is not governance — that is economic sabotage.
This administration is protecting taxpayers, defending constitutional limits, and ensuring programs like SNAP are funded through legitimate appropriations — not judicial diktats.
President Trump has shown time and again that his administration won’t be bullied into lawlessness, even when Democrats and their judicial allies demand it.
Let’s not forget: this crisis was caused by congressional Democrats who refused to pass a clean funding bill. They chose shutdown over compromise.
Now, they want to blame Trump for their failure to govern? That’s not just dishonest — it’s disgraceful.
The USDA had already begun working to distribute partial SNAP payments using what limited resources were available, showing the administration’s commitment to support struggling families within the law.
But Democrats don’t want solutions. They want spectacles. They’d rather stir outrage than engage in serious governance.
States like Pennsylvania, Oregon, and California rushed to comply with the judge’s ruling — not because they had to, but because they wanted to score political points against the administration.
Yet Trump held the line. His administration’s appeal to the Supreme Court was not about denying aid — it was about defending the rule of law.
And once again, Trump was right. The Court understood that real leadership means respecting constitutional boundaries, not rewriting them from the bench.
Justice Jackson’s stay gives the administration breathing room to make its case, and protects the executive branch from being railroaded by a hyper-political lower court.
This moment highlights exactly why Trump’s judicial appointments mattered—because constitutional sanity must prevail when government overreach runs wild.