Washington Explodes as Chip Roy and John Kennedy Unveil the “American Sharia Freedom Act,” Drawing a Hard Line Against Foreign Law in U.S. Courts.D1

Washington erupted into chaos as Representatives Chip Roy and Senator John Kennedy unveiled the controversial “American Sharia Freedom Act,” drawing an unmistakable line against the use of foreign law in U.S. courts. Supporters hailed it as a bold defense of American sovereignty, while critics warned it could ignite a fierce legal and cultural battle. Cameras flashed, tempers flared, and whispers of sweeping consequences raced through Capitol Hill. With passions rising on both sides, one question now dominates the debate: how far will this fight go—and what comes next?

The proposal was introduced during a crowded press conference, where Roy and Kennedy framed the legislation as a preventative measure meant to protect the Constitution. “American courts should apply American law—period,” Roy said, emphasizing that the bill would bar judges from considering foreign legal codes in domestic cases when they conflict with constitutional rights. Kennedy echoed the point, arguing that the measure is about clarity and consistency in the legal system, not about targeting any faith or community.

At its core, the bill seeks to prohibit the enforcement of foreign laws or legal principles in U.S. courts if they undermine constitutional protections such as free speech, equal protection, or due process. While the bill’s title references “Sharia,” its text, according to sponsors, is broader—aimed at any foreign legal framework. “This is a firewall,” Kennedy said. “It’s about preserving the supremacy of the Constitution.”

Reaction was immediate and intense. Conservative lawmakers and advocacy groups praised the act as a long-overdue safeguard against what they describe as creeping legal relativism. They argue that global commerce, immigration, and international contracts have increased the chances that foreign legal standards could influence domestic rulings. For them, the bill is a clear statement that American law remains paramount.

Opponents, however, swiftly condemned the proposal as unnecessary and inflammatory. Civil liberties organizations warned that singling out “Sharia” by name risks stigmatizing Muslim Americans and could invite constitutional challenges of its own. “U.S. courts already operate under the Constitution,” said one legal scholar. “Judges routinely reject foreign law when it conflicts with fundamental rights. This bill appears redundant at best and discriminatory at worst.”

Democratic leaders questioned the motivation behind the legislation, suggesting it may be designed more to energize political bases than to address a real legal gap. They pointed to decades of case law affirming that the Constitution supersedes any foreign legal considerations. “This is a solution in search of a problem,” one senator remarked, warning that the rhetoric surrounding the bill could deepen cultural divides.

Legal experts are divided on the bill’s potential impact. Some say it would have little practical effect but could complicate international business disputes, family law cases involving multinational parties, or arbitration agreements that reference foreign statutes. Others believe it could invite lawsuits challenging its constitutionality, particularly if courts interpret the language as targeting a specific religion rather than a neutral legal principle.

Beyond the legal ramifications, the political stakes are high. The bill arrives amid broader debates over immigration, national identity, and the role of global norms in American governance. Social media lit up within hours of the announcement, with supporters celebrating the move as patriotic and critics decrying it as fear-driven politics. Hashtags surged, talk shows booked emergency panels, and advocacy groups on both sides began mobilizing.

As the legislation heads toward committee review, Capitol Hill braces for hearings that promise sharp exchanges and national attention. Amendments are expected, and behind-the-scenes negotiations may determine whether the bill advances or stalls. For now, the “American Sharia Freedom Act” has succeeded in one undeniable way: it has reignited a combustible debate over law, identity, and the boundaries of American sovereignty—one that shows no sign of cooling anytime soon.