Land, liberty and the law: Texas bans CAIR from property ownership in sweeping order
By willowt // 2025-11-20
Copy
 
  • Governor Abbott designates the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as terrorist organizations under Texas law.
  • The unprecedented state-level action prohibits the groups and their affiliates from purchasing land in Texas.
  • The move is based on state statutes, as neither group is listed as a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department.
  • CAIR, a Muslim civil rights group, condemned the proclamation as a politically motivated stunt rooted in anti-Muslim bigotry.
  • Legal experts anticipate constitutional challenges, citing potential First Amendment and Equal Protection violations.
In a move that tests the boundaries of state power in national security, Texas Governor Greg Abbott on Tuesday, Nov. 18, designated the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations as foreign terrorist and criminal organizations within the state. The proclamation, issued unilaterally by the governor, immediately bans the groups and any affiliated individuals or entities from acquiring real estate in Texas and subjects them to potential asset forfeiture and criminal penalties under state law. This action places Texas in a direct confrontation with a prominent American Muslim civil rights organization and sets the stage for a complex legal battle over constitutional rights and state authority.

The legal basis and rationale

Governor Abbott’s proclamation invokes specific Texas statutes, including the Penal Code and Property Code, which grant the governor expanded authority to identify threatening entities. In his official statement, Abbott asserted that the groups support global terrorism and aim to subvert U.S. laws. “The Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR have long made their goals clear: to forcibly impose Sharia law and establish Islam’s ‘mastership of the world,’” Abbott stated. “The actions taken by the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR to support terrorism across the globe and subvert our laws through violence, intimidation and harassment are unacceptable,” he added. The governor’s order cites CAIR’s origins and its past status as an unindicted co-conspirator in a major terrorism financing trial, the Holy Land Foundation case, which was prosecuted in Texas.

A contentious designation without federal backing

The governor’s action is notable for its independence from the federal government’s official stance. The U.S. State Department, which holds the primary authority for designating Foreign Terrorist Organizations, does not list either the Muslim Brotherhood or CAIR as such. This discrepancy is central to the controversy, as Texas is applying a national security label that the federal government has not endorsed. The move aligns with efforts by some federal lawmakers, including Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who reintroduced a bill in June to designate the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. However, by acting at the state level, Abbott has accelerated a policy that remains stalled in Congress.

Immediate condemnation and allegations of bigotry

CAIR, a nationwide organization dedicated to protecting Muslim civil liberties, responded forcefully to the designation. In a statement, the group dismissed the proclamation as a “publicity stunt masquerading as a proclamation” that has “no basis in fact or law.” CAIR accused Governor Abbott of advancing “anti-Muslim bigotry” rather than serving Texans. The organization highlighted its consistent condemnations of terrorism and noted that its advocacy has made it a target for groups like ISIS. CAIR signaled its readiness to mount a legal challenge if the declaration is enforced as policy, framing the issue as a fundamental attack on religious freedom and free speech.

Potential legal and constitutional challenges

Legal scholars anticipate that the proclamation will face significant legal hurdles. Emily Berman, a professor at the University of Houston Law Center, identified several potential constitutional issues. The action could violate the First Amendment by discriminating against groups based on their religious views or political perspectives, particularly regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It may also run afoul of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. Furthermore, the designation raises due process concerns, as the state-level process for a group to challenge its designation is unclear, unlike the formal appeals process available for federal terrorist designations.

A new frontier in state-level security policy

Governor Abbott’s proclamation represents a bold experiment in state-level counterterrorism policy, with immediate and far-reaching consequences. By leveraging state laws to target organizations not designated by the federal government, Texas is charting a controversial course that other states may seek to follow. The ensuing legal battles will likely determine the extent to which states can independently define and combat national security threats, setting a precedent for the balance of power between state and federal authority and the protection of constitutional rights for all Americans. Sources for this article include: TheHill.com TexasTribune.org HStoday.us
Copy