Encouraging the United States Congress to require the United States Secretary of State to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization.
Summary
House Concurrent Resolution 13 is a nonbinding expression of support from the Indiana General Assembly urging the United States Congress to require the U.S. Secretary of State to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization under Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The resolution recites findings that the federal government has authority to identify and respond to terrorist threats, describes the Muslim Brotherhood as a transnational Sunni Islamist organization founded in Egypt, and notes that some of its branches or affiliates have been linked by national security assessments and international observers to extremist ideology and violence.
The resolution does not change Indiana criminal law, immigration law, or any state regulatory scheme. Instead, it seeks to influence federal policy by formally communicating the General Assembly’s support for federal designation of the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization and directing the House clerk to transmit the resolution to the sponsoring legislator for distribution. Any legal consequences would flow only if federal authorities acted on the request; the resolution itself has no direct enforcement mechanism or statutory effect within Indiana.
Impact
The bill has no direct effect on Indiana statutes, state agencies, or private parties because it is a concurrent resolution rather than a law. Its practical impact is symbolic and political: it places the Indiana General Assembly on record in favor of federal terrorist-organization designation authority being used against the Muslim Brotherhood, and it may be cited as part of broader state-level advocacy on national security and foreign policy issues.
Sentiment
Based on the text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the measure appears to have been introduced in a strongly supportive posture toward the resolution’s underlying premise. The language is assertive and framed around national security concerns, suggesting the sponsors intended to signal concern about Islamist extremism and support for federal counterterrorism tools. Because there are no transcripts or vote records provided, there is no evidence here of organized opposition or amendment activity, but the subject matter itself is likely to draw strong reactions from both supporters and critics.
Contention
The main point of contention is the resolution’s characterization of the Muslim Brotherhood and whether it should be treated as a foreign terrorist organization under U.S. law. Supporters are likely to emphasize national security, the cited foreign designations by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, and the need for federal tools to address organizations linked to violence. Critics would likely question the breadth of the designation, the reliability and neutrality of the cited assessments, and whether a state legislature should weigh in on a complex federal foreign-policy and national-security determination. Because the resolution is nonbinding, the dispute is primarily political and symbolic rather than legal.
Urging regional transmission organizations, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the United States Department of Energy, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, and the United States