We, the undersigned citizens of the United States, petition our elected representatives to enact legislation or pursue constitutional measures (such as an amendment if necessary) to bar individuals who adhere to core Islamic doctrines—specifically those mandating Sharia supremacy—from holding any federal, state, or local public office. This includes elected positions, appointments, judgeships, and civil service roles involving policymaking or enforcement of law.

Reasons Why Islam, as a Political-Theological Ideology, Is Contrary to the United States, Our Founding Fathers, and Our Constitution

Supremacy of Sharia Over Man-Made Law and the Constitution

Core Islamic texts assert that Allah's law (Sharia) is supreme and that human laws (including democratic constitutions) not derived from it are illegitimate or inferior. Quran 5:44 states that those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed are "disbelievers," "wrongdoers," or "defiantly disobedient." Similar verses (e.g., 5:45-47, 33:36) emphasize total submission to divine commands over secular governance. Sharia encompasses not just personal faith but a comprehensive legal, political, and social system governing criminal penalties, family law, finance, and governance.

This directly conflicts with the U.S. Constitution as the "supreme Law of the Land" (Article VI). Our system is based on popular sovereignty, separation of powers, and amendable secular law—not divine fiat. A public official bound by an ideology that prioritizes external religious law over the Constitution cannot faithfully swear the required oath to "support and defend" it.

Rejection of Religious Liberty and Equality

The First Amendment guarantees no establishment of religion and free exercise for all. The Founding Fathers, influenced by Enlightenment values and Christian heritage, envisioned a pluralistic republic where government protects conscience but does not coerce belief. Many states originally had Christian tests for office, but the federal Constitution rejected religious tests to prevent favoritism or persecution—yet this assumed religions compatible with republican liberty.

Classical Islamic doctrine divides the world into Dar al-Islam (house of submission) and Dar al-Harb (house of war), with non-Muslims (kafirs) subject to dhimmi status, jizya tax, or worse under full Sharia. Apostasy (leaving Islam) and blasphemy (criticizing Muhammad or the Quran) are punishable by death in traditional Sharia schools. Freedom of speech, including criticism of religion, is a cornerstone of American liberty (protected even for offensive expression). An official adhering to doctrines that treat criticism of Islam as a capital offense or subordinate non-Muslims cannot uphold equal protection under the 14th Amendment or First Amendment rights.

Views on Women, Apostates, and Non-Muslims

Sharia prescriptions include unequal inheritance and testimony for women (Quran 2:282, 4:34), guardianship systems, and permissions for polygamy and corporal punishments. These clash with American principles of equal rights regardless of sex. Polls of Muslim populations in the West and abroad frequently show significant support for Sharia elements like these, hudud punishments (amputation, stoning), or death for apostasy—views incompatible with oath-bound defense of constitutional equality.

The Founders emphasized moral foundations often rooted in Judeo-Christian ethics (e.g., John Adams: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people"). While some Founders owned Qurans for study or referenced Islam hypothetically in religious freedom debates, they viewed it critically as a system of "imposture" or tyranny in practice (e.g., early U.S. conflicts with Barbary states invoking Quranic justifications for piracy and slavery against non-Muslims). Thomas Jefferson's dealings with Tripoli highlighted Islamic ambassadors citing the Quran as authorizing war on "sinners" (non-submissive nations).

Political Nature of Islam vs. Separation of Mosque and State

Unlike many faiths that separate spiritual and temporal authority, Islam fuses religion, law, and state (as in the example of Muhammad's rule in Medina and historical caliphates). Islamist groups (e.g., those linked to Muslim Brotherhood ideology) have explicitly sought gradual "civilization jihad" or subversion to advance Sharia influence in Western societies. This includes efforts to accommodate parallel legal systems or influence policy.

American founding rejected theocracy or established churches. George Washington and others welcomed diverse believers as citizens if they upheld republican virtues, but an ideology commanding loyalty to a global ummah (Muslim community) above national allegiance poses a conflict of interest for officeholders. Historical patterns in countries implementing Sharia show erosion of secular democracy, minority rights, and individual freedoms—contrary to the "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" in the Declaration.

Oath of Office and National Security

Every officeholder must swear or affirm to support the Constitution. An adherent to an ideology that deems man-made law subordinate (and in some interpretations, mandates its eventual replacement) faces an irreconcilable dilemma akin to a conflict of interest. Precedents exist for scrutinizing ideologies hostile to the Constitution (e.g., past bars on certain totalitarian affiliations). Given documented cases of Sharia advocacy, honor-based violence, and supremacist rhetoric in some Muslim communities, public safety and fidelity to oath justify restrictions on those who prioritize Islamic governance.

We recognize that individual Muslims may personally reject political Sharia or live peacefully under U.S. law. This petition targets ideological adherence to supremacist doctrines, not private belief or ethnicity. It seeks to protect the constitutional order, much as the Founders guarded against threats to liberty.

Action Requested:

Introduce and pass federal legislation clarifying that adherence to Sharia-supremacist doctrines disqualifies one from office (modeled on existing foreign agent or loyalty standards).

Support state-level measures and a potential constitutional clarification.

Hold hearings on ideological compatibility with American governance.

Sign this petition to affirm that no foreign or religious legal system may supplant our Constitution. America was founded on principles of liberty under law—not submission to any caliphate or theocracy.