Preserving a Sharia-Free America Act
Summary
The "Preserving a Sharia-Free America Act" aims to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act. It seeks to deny entry or deport aliens who advocate for Sharia law in a manner that violates the rights of others under the U.S. Constitution or federal/state law. The bill also includes provisions for revoking immigration benefits and visas for those who make false statements regarding their advocacy of Sharia law.
Expected Effects
This act, if enacted, would broaden the grounds for inadmissibility and deportability under immigration law. It would grant significant discretion to the Secretary of State, Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Attorney General in determining whether an alien's advocacy of Sharia law meets the criteria for denial of immigration benefits or removal.
Potential Benefits
- Potentially strengthens national security by preventing individuals who may pose a threat to constitutional rights from entering or remaining in the U.S.
- Could be seen as upholding the Constitution by preventing the imposition of legal systems that may conflict with it.
- May reassure some segments of the population concerned about the influence of foreign legal systems.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential for violation of the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech and religion.
- Risk of discriminatory application based on subjective interpretations of Sharia law and its potential conflict with U.S. law.
- Could harm the U.S.'s international standing by signaling intolerance towards certain religious or legal traditions.
- The bill's broad language could lead to the denial of entry or deportation of individuals with moderate or nuanced views on Sharia law.
- The elimination of judicial review for determinations made under subsection (b) raises concerns about due process.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutionality is questionable, particularly concerning the First Amendment's guarantees of freedom of speech and religion. While the government has the power to regulate immigration, such regulations must not infringe upon constitutionally protected rights. The bill's broad language and potential for subjective interpretation could lead to the suppression of protected speech and religious expression. The lack of judicial review also raises concerns about due process, potentially conflicting with the Fifth Amendment.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).