Texas Draws Hard Line: Abbott Pushes 'Total Ban' on Sharia Law

Paul Riverbank, 1/15/2026Texas escalates its fight against Sharia law amid legal battles, while Congress faces a looming shutdown over homeland security funding—highlighting deep divisions in state and national politics.

On air with Glenn Beck, Abbott gave more than a wink toward the next chapter—he all but promised that a sweeping ban on Sharia law is headed straight for the Texas statute books. "That will pass overwhelmingly," he predicted, framing it as a foregone conclusion given the mood in the state Republican Party. The subtext? The Texas political establishment wants the wider public, and perhaps Washington as well, to notice.

Naturally, the courts didn’t need much prompting. The local chapters of CAIR in Dallas-Fort Worth and Austin fired back with lawsuits charging, among other things, that their First Amendment rights had been put through the wringer. Abbott, undeterred, seized on amendments made by CAIR to their legal complaint as evidence that the group was tacitly conceding something untoward—although legal experts might argue such filings rarely tell the whole story. Speaking to Beck, he recounted how CAIR had “deleted that they were fully in compliance with federal state law” and omitted earlier denials of national security threats or terrorist links. Abbott interpreted those tweaks as silent admissions. "It’s a concession on their part that actually they are not in compliance with the federal and state law; that they are engaged in terrorism; that they are a threat to national security," he asserted—though it bears mentioning, legal proceedings, especially in areas as fraught as this, are rarely so clear-cut.

This dispute isn’t unfolding in a vacuum, either. Recent months saw a law signed in Texas aimed at preventing developments like the East Plano Islamic Center from allegedly operating as “Sharia compounds”—a phrase that, depending on who you ask, is either a plainspoken warning or pure alarmism. The law’s premise: faith is one thing, but setting up parallel legal systems is another. In his directive, Abbott drew a distinction between Americans’ right to worship and what he portrayed as groups trying to “set up courts purporting to replace actual courts of law to evade neutral and generally applicable laws.”

Conservative commentators have hailed the move as overdue, while opponents cite the risk of painting Muslim communities with the broadest possible brush. It's not just a legislative debate; it’s a cultural one, with both sides bracing for the inevitable court fights that tend to follow showdowns like this.

Meanwhile, back in Washington, D.C., another kind of impasse is playing out. Lawmakers unveiled an $80 billion “minibus” spending package that covers big-ticket items—from the State Department to federal financial agencies. Oddly missing from the list: the Department of Homeland Security. The omission isn’t oversight; it’s fallout from a standoff over a controversial ICE shooting incident in Minneapolis, which has become a proxy battlefield for the two main parties.

Democrats are holding up funding for Homeland Security while demanding answers about the shooting, questioning the agency’s use of force. Republicans, backed by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, counter that the ICE officer had little choice but to act after being struck by a vehicle. The two sides seem dug in, with the result being that, for now at least, money isn’t flowing as freely as speeches do.

If there’s any area where lawmakers are trading barbs—and, occasionally, handshakes—it’s over the rest of the budget. The State Department and security bill, for instance, includes a hefty line item for a new “America First Opportunity Fund,” a concept designed to give the Secretary of State added flexibility abroad. Republicans cheer the removal of “woke programming, climate change mandates, and divisive gender ideologies," while Democrats point to the preservation of funding for family planning initiatives and the UN Population Fund. Both sides, in classic Beltway fashion, claim victory.

House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole, true to form, said the package advances President Trump’s vision of “security, responsibility, and growth.” Not to be outdone, Democrat Rosa DeLauro credited her party for fending off “extreme cuts” floated by President Trump and his congressional allies.

Yet for all the posturing, a familiar specter looms: the threat of a partial government shutdown, with Congress staring down a deadline at month’s end. The sticking point, as ever, is whether enough political will can be mustered—especially on the polarizing issue of Homeland Security spending. Speaker Mike Johnson struck a tone of forced confidence: “I think we will” avoid a shutdown, though he was quick to add that limiting homeland security funding would be reckless, “especially at a dangerous time.”

All of which means, for Texans and for the rest of the country, that the coming weeks will be anything but dull. The collision between Abbott’s aggressive moves on Sharia law and the slow churn of appropriations in D.C. is more than just procedural. It lays bare the divides—political, cultural, even philosophical—running through the country right now. We’re watching not just policies but precedents being forged for the months, and perhaps years, ahead.

If you’ve been paying even half-attention to Texas politics lately, you’ll know the governor has taken a stance on Sharia law that leaves little room for ambiguity. Governor Greg Abbott, known for making headlines when others might choose caution, recently moved to classify both the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Brotherhood as foreign terrorist organizations. Not exactly the type of measure that slips by quietly.On air with Glenn Beck, Abbott gave more than a wink toward the next chapter—he all but promised that a sweeping ban on Sharia law is headed straight for the Texas statute books. "That will pass overwhelmingly," he predicted, framing it as a foregone conclusion given the mood in the state Republican Party. The subtext? The Texas political establishment wants the wider public, and perhaps Washington as well, to notice.Naturally, the courts didn’t need much prompting. The local chapters of CAIR in Dallas-Fort Worth and Austin fired back with lawsuits charging, among other things, that their First Amendment rights had been put through the wringer. Abbott, undeterred, seized on amendments made by CAIR to their legal complaint as evidence that the group was tacitly conceding something untoward—although legal experts might argue such filings rarely tell the whole story. Speaking to Beck, he recounted how CAIR had “deleted that they were fully in compliance with federal state law” and omitted earlier denials of national security threats or terrorist links. Abbott interpreted those tweaks as silent admissions. "It’s a concession on their part that actually they are not in compliance with the federal and state law; that they are engaged in terrorism; that they are a threat to national security," he asserted—though it bears mentioning, legal proceedings, especially in areas as fraught as this, are rarely so clear-cut.This dispute isn’t unfolding in a vacuum, either. Recent months saw a law signed in Texas aimed at preventing developments like the East Plano Islamic Center from allegedly operating as “Sharia compounds”—a phrase that, depending on who you ask, is either a plainspoken warning or pure alarmism. The law’s premise: faith is one thing, but setting up parallel legal systems is another. In his directive, Abbott drew a distinction between Americans’ right to worship and what he portrayed as groups trying to “set up courts purporting to replace actual courts of law to evade neutral and generally applicable laws.”Conservative commentators have hailed the move as overdue, while opponents cite the risk of painting Muslim communities with the broadest possible brush. It's not just a legislative debate; it’s a cultural one, with both sides bracing for the inevitable court fights that tend to follow showdowns like this.Meanwhile, back in Washington, D.C., another kind of impasse is playing out. Lawmakers unveiled an $80 billion “minibus” spending package that covers big-ticket items—from the State Department to federal financial agencies. Oddly missing from the list: the Department of Homeland Security. The omission isn’t oversight; it’s fallout from a standoff over a controversial ICE shooting incident in Minneapolis, which has become a proxy battlefield for the two main parties.Democrats are holding up funding for Homeland Security while demanding answers about the shooting, questioning the agency’s use of force. Republicans, backed by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, counter that the ICE officer had little choice but to act after being struck by a vehicle. The two sides seem dug in, with the result being that, for now at least, money isn’t flowing as freely as speeches do.If there’s any area where lawmakers are trading barbs—and, occasionally, handshakes—it’s over the rest of the budget. The State Department and security bill, for instance, includes a hefty line item for a new “America First Opportunity Fund,” a concept designed to give the Secretary of State added flexibility abroad. Republicans cheer the removal of “woke programming, climate change mandates, and divisive gender ideologies," while Democrats point to the preservation of funding for family planning initiatives and the UN Population Fund. Both sides, in classic Beltway fashion, claim victory.House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole, true to form, said the package advances President Trump’s vision of “security, responsibility, and growth.” Not to be outdone, Democrat Rosa DeLauro credited her party for fending off “extreme cuts” floated by President Trump and his congressional allies.Yet for all the posturing, a familiar specter looms: the threat of a partial government shutdown, with Congress staring down a deadline at month’s end. The sticking point, as ever, is whether enough political will can be mustered—especially on the polarizing issue of Homeland Security spending. Speaker Mike Johnson struck a tone of forced confidence: “I think we will” avoid a shutdown, though he was quick to add that limiting homeland security funding would be reckless, “especially at a dangerous time.”All of which means, for Texans and for the rest of the country, that the coming weeks will be anything but dull. The collision between Abbott’s aggressive moves on Sharia law and the slow churn of appropriations in D.C. is more than just procedural. It lays bare the divides—political, cultural, even philosophical—running through the country right now. We’re watching not just policies but precedents being forged for the months, and perhaps years, ahead.