Article By David Lindfield (Comments by Steve Allen)
A staggering one-in-four American voters aged 18 to 35 would support a town, city, or state adopting Islamic Sharia Law as its legal code, even if it means overriding current laws and constitutional rights and freedoms, alarming new polling data has revealed.
The disturbing support for the anti-American laws was revealed in polling released this week by Our Republic and Rasmussen.
This is no surprise to me since most people in this age group have no clue and no understanding of Islam or Sharia law. They also have no understanding that their life as they’ve always known it would be gone forever if they adopted and accepted sharia law as the law of the land in America.
18 to 35-year-olds I’ve grown up living with the entitlement spirit all around them, but there’s no way to prepare them for what life would be like if they accepted this graceless and tyrannical level of law keeping.
The findings reveal substantial support among younger voters for government enforcement of a religious legal system, raising concerns about their understanding of constitutional protections and individual rights.
Overall, 21% of likely voters expressed a mostly or somewhat positive opinion of Sharia, while 57% expressed a negative opinion.
Positive views were significantly higher among younger respondents: 43% of voters ages 18–24 and 39% of those ages 25–29.
Constitutional Freedoms Treated as Obstacles
Our Republic President Justin Haskins argues that the results reflect a failure to understand the Constitution and the protections it provides.
“Too many have been taught to see constitutional limits as obstacles to progress, especially when those limits stand in the way of policies they believe would help groups they view as oppressed,” Haskins said.
“Because Muslims are widely perceived by young people as an oppressed or marginalized group, I suspect many default to a sympathetic view of policies associated with Islam without seriously considering whether those policies are compatible with constitutional freedoms,” Haskins added.
“The irony is that, in doing so, they may be undermining the very rights they claim to care about.”
Haskins connects that thinking to what he calls “the oppressor-versus-oppressed framework associated with Critical Theory.”
Under that framework, sympathy for a group perceived as marginalized can take precedence over examining whether its associated policies protect individual liberty.
Haskins does not believe the respondents are necessarily committed Islamists or that they primarily view Sharia as an expression of religious liberty.
Rather, Haskins said, “the more important factor is that Muslims are widely perceived as an oppressed or marginalized group in the United States.”
“Within that framework, groups perceived as marginalized are often treated sympathetically without much scrutiny of what those groups or their belief systems actually teach,” Haskins said.
Refugee Admissions Add to Immigration Debate
The polling comes alongside figures from the State Department showing that refugee admissions from 45 majority-Muslim countries reached 21,096 in December 2024, former President Joe Biden’s final full month in office.
The figures add immigration policy to the debate over how support for Sharia develops in Western countries.
The supplied comparison with France points to growing support for Sharia among young French Muslims, driven by stricter religious observance, and raises the concern that support for such a system can arrive alongside immigration from Muslim-majority nations.
But the American polling also highlights a domestic problem: young voters raised under constitutional protections are expressing support for replacing a community’s legal code with a religious system.
Haskins’ concern is that their political education has left them more committed to an ideological hierarchy of oppressors and victims than to the freedoms that protect everyone.
Young Voters Back Dismantling Israel for Cheaper Energy
Another finding from the polling series showed substantial support among younger Americans for eliminating Israel in exchange for ending the Iran war and lowering U.S. energy prices.
Among voters ages 18–24, 46% supported the proposal.
Among those ages 25–29, support reached 60%.
Our Republic’s question described a proposal “to completely dismantle Israel and replace it with a Palestinian-led nation in exchange for ending the war with Iran and providing the United States with lower oil and gas prices.”
The results reinforce Haskins’ warning about how younger voters assess issues involving groups they consider oppressed.
In this case, large shares of young respondents supported dismantling an entire country as part of a bargain promising peace and cheaper fuel.
French Unrest Highlights Red-Green Alliance
The debate is unfolding as student unrest spreads across France, with rioters burning trash bins, school buildings, and police barriers.
Demonstrators have cited failing schools and budget cuts. Some have taken selfies beside the fires.
Hamas and communist flags have appeared at the protests, reinforcing concerns about the alliance between far-left activism and Islamist political causes.
The Center for Renewing America describes the Red-Green Alliance as drawing “on two seemingly conflicting ideologies — Marxism and Islamism — bound together by a common mission to tear down the traditional American way of life.”
That shared opposition to Western institutions echoes the framework Haskins identifies: political causes are judged through an oppressor-versus-oppressed narrative, while the principles those causes threaten receive less scrutiny.
Lawmakers Warn Sharia Undermines Equal Protection
Rep. Keith Self (R-TX), who partnered with Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) to establish the Sharia-Free America Caucus, has detailed why imposing Sharia as a parallel legal system conflicts with the Constitution.
“Sharia creates unequal legal standards by distinguishing between Muslims and non-Muslims, men and women, and believers and dissenters,” Self wrote.
“These distinctions undermine constitutional protections and expose individuals to social or legal pressure that conflicts with American guarantees of freedom and equality.
“The United States cannot sustain parallel legal systems because the rule of law depends on one constitutional standard applying equally to every citizen.”
Haskins describes Sharia as “a comprehensive religious and legal system,” arguing that young Americans’ sympathy may outweigh their understanding of what its implementation entails.
The polling therefore presents more than a question about attitudes toward religion. It asks whether voters would accept a different legal code governing their community because a majority demanded it.
Constitutional protections exist precisely to safeguard individual rights against that kind of majority pressure.
Schools Face Questions Over What Students Are Learning
Lawmakers are already organizing against the imposition of Sharia, but legislation alone does not address the attitudes revealed by the polling.
Haskins’ analysis points toward education shaping those attitudes: teaching young people to evaluate policies according to which groups appear oppressed, rather than whether the policies preserve freedom and equality.
One in four young voters surveyed would support Sharia as their community’s legal code.
Substantial shares would also support dismantling Israel in exchange for lower energy prices and an end to war.
For conservatives, those findings put constitutional education squarely at the center of the problem.
Protecting America’s freedoms requires more than passing laws.
It requires confronting what young Americans are being taught about their country, individual rights, and the political movements asking them to surrender those protections.
Be the first to comment