The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States, has praised members of both political parties for defending constitutional protections and religious liberty during a recent House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing widely criticized as an anti-Muslim spectacle.
The hearing, convened under the premise of examining alleged threats posed by so-called “Sharia-based institutions,” was viewed by civil rights advocates as part of a broader political effort to revive long-debunked conspiracy theories about Islam undermining American law. Witnesses invited to testify included individuals with documented histories of anti-Muslim rhetoric, some of whom openly advocated policies that would violate core constitutional principles.
Sparse Attendance Underscores Public Rejection
Observers noted that the hearing attracted minimal attendance. The nearly empty chamber was occupied largely by members of Muslim and Jewish communities who attended to challenge the assumptions underlying the proceedings, rather than support them. The lack of broader interest further highlighted what CAIR described as the manufactured nature of the controversy.
Lawmakers Reaffirm Constitutional Principles
During the session, several lawmakers forcefully reiterated that the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land and guarantees freedom of religion without exception. Ranking Subcommittee Member Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-PA), Ranking Judiciary Committee Member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), and Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) emphasized that no religious community can be singled out or penalized based on fear-driven narratives.
READ MORE: Daghestan Imam Arrested Over Alleged Murder of Second Wife
Their remarks underscored that religious freedom applies equally to all Americans, including Muslims, and that the First Amendment prevents government intrusion into lawful religious practice.
Legal Expert Warns Against Targeting Any Faith
CAIR also commended Professor Ilya Somin of the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University. In his testimony, Somin reaffirmed that attempts to legislate against a specific religion pose serious constitutional dangers. He warned that singling out Islam for scrutiny or restriction undermines the very legal framework lawmakers are sworn to protect.
CAIR Condemns Dangerous Political Rhetoric
Robert S. McCaw, CAIR’s Government Affairs Director, attended the hearing and submitted an official statement for the record. In a post-hearing response, he praised lawmakers who defended the Constitution while strongly condemning what he described as the true intent behind the hearing.
McCaw warned that political movements branding Islam as incompatible with American values are not engaging in legitimate policy debate, but instead laying groundwork for discrimination and exclusion. He stressed that history shows how such rhetoric often precedes broader campaigns of persecution.
“Religious freedom is not conditional,” McCaw stated. “Muslim Americans are not outsiders to the Constitution, nor is our faith foreign to the principles of liberty and justice.”
Hearing Failed to Produce Evidence
The hearing was chaired by Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), who framed the session around claims that Islamic legal principles threaten American governance. However, despite repeated assertions, witnesses failed to provide concrete examples of any coordinated effort to override U.S. law or constitutional authority.
CAIR’s Proactive Response
Ahead of the hearing, CAIR distributed briefing materials to Judiciary Committee members, released documentation outlining the backgrounds and past statements of several witnesses, and submitted educational resources explaining how Islamic religious practices function within the boundaries of U.S. law. The organization also provided a fact sheet addressing common misconceptions about Sharia and its role in the lives of American Muslims.
Concerns Over Witness Selection
CAIR raised alarms about several witnesses selected for the hearing, citing publicly documented ties to anti-Muslim activism and conspiracy networks. Some individuals previously supported legislation that would have criminalized Islamic religious practice, while others have been labeled extremists by civil rights organizations for promoting fear and hostility toward Muslim communities.
Advocacy groups argue that elevating such voices under the banner of congressional oversight legitimizes prejudice and distorts public understanding of Islam.
Revival of a Long-Discredited Narrative
Civil rights advocates note that the “anti-Sharia” narrative has resurfaced repeatedly over the past two decades, often during election cycles, as a tool to mobilize voters through fear. Critics say the strategy relies on misinformation rather than facts and distracts from genuine policy issues facing the nation.
CAIR reiterated that Muslim Americans, like all citizens, live under and abide by the U.S. Constitution, and that attempts to portray their faith as a threat are not only false but dangerous.
