US Federal House Bill HB5722

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 10/8/25
• Refer: 10/8/25

Caption

Preserving a Sharia-Free America Act

Summary

HB5722, titled the “Preserving a Sharia-Free America Act,” would direct the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Attorney General to deny immigration benefits, visas, immigration relief, and admission to the United States to any noncitizen determined to adhere to Sharia law. It also requires revocation of existing immigration benefits or visas for such individuals and makes them inadmissible, deportable, and subject to removal. The bill further provides that any noncitizen who makes false statements about adherence to Sharia law in matters within federal jurisdiction would face the same immigration consequences. In addition, it states that determinations made by the designated agency heads under the act would be final and not subject to judicial review, limiting court oversight of these decisions.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to create a new categorical ground for denial and removal based on an individual’s alleged adherence to Sharia law. It would affect visa processing, immigration benefits, asylum or other immigration relief, admissibility determinations, and deportation proceedings, while also restricting federal court review of agency decisions made under the act.

Sentiment

There is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal legislative sentiment can be measured from hearings or roll calls. Based on the bill text and title, the measure appears to be framed by its sponsors as a national security and immigration enforcement proposal, but it is also highly likely to be viewed as controversial because it targets a religious legal framework and gives broad, non-reviewable authority to executive officials.

Contention

The main points of contention are likely to be constitutional and civil-liberties concerns, including religious discrimination, due process, equal protection, and the bill’s attempt to bar judicial review of agency determinations. Supporters would likely argue it is intended to protect national security and prevent entry by individuals perceived as incompatible with U.S. law, while opponents would likely argue that it unlawfully singles out Muslims or people associated with Islamic law and creates vague, potentially unworkable standards for immigration enforcement.