Center for Security Policy, William G. Boykin et al.,
2010

[…] While detailed recommendations for adopting a more prudential and effective strategy for surviving shariah’s onslaught are beyond the scope of this study, several policy and programmatic changes are in order.  These include:

• U.S. policymakers, financiers, businessmen, judges, journalists, community leaders and the public at large must be equipped with an accurate understanding of the nature of shariah and the necessity of keeping America shariah-free.  At a minimum, this will entail resisting – rather than acquiescing to – the concerted efforts now being made to allow that alien legal code to become established in this country as an alternate, parallel system to the Constitution and the laws enacted pursuant to it. Arguably, this is already in effect for those who have taken an oath to “support and defend” the Constitution, because the requirement is subsumed in that oath. 
• U.S. government agencies and organizations should cease their outreach to Muslim communities through Muslim Brotherhood fronts whose mission is to destroy our country from within, as such practices are both reckless and counterproductive.  Indeed, these activities serve to legitimate, protect and expand the influence of our enemies.  They conduce to no successful legal outcome that cannot be better advanced via aggressive prosecution of terrorists, terror-funders and other lawbreakers.  The practice also discourages patriotic Muslims from providing actual assistance to the U.S. government lest they be marked for ostracism or worse by the Ikhwan and other shariah-adherent members of their communities.
• In keeping with Article VI of the Constitution, extend bans currently in effect that bar members of hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, and endorsers of child abuse and other crimes, from holding positions of trust in federal, state, or local governments or the armed forces of the United States to those who espouse or support shariah.  Instead, every effort should be made to identify and empower Muslims who are willing publicly to denounce shariah.
• Practices that promote shariah – notably, shariah-compliant finance and the establishment or promotion in public spaces or with public funds or facilities and activities that give preferential treatment to shariah’s adherents – are incompatible with the Constitution and the freedoms it enshrines and must be proscribed.
• Sedition is prohibited by law in the United States.  To the extent that imams and mosques are being used to advocate shariah in America, they are promoting seditious activity and should be warned that they will be subject to investigation and prosecution. 
• Textbooks used in both secular educational systems and Islamic schools must not promote shariah, its tenets, or the notion that America must submit to its dictates. Schools that promote anti-constitutional teaching should be denied taxpayer funding and lose their charters, accreditation and charitable tax status.
• Compounds and communities that seek to segregate themselves on the basis of shariah law, apply it alongside or in lieu of the law of the land or otherwise establish themselves as “no-go” zones for law enforcement and other authorities must be thwarted in such efforts. In this connection, assertion of claims to territory around segregationist mosques should be proscribed.
• Immigration of those who adhere to shariah must be precluded, as was previously done with adherents to the seditious ideology of communism.

 Such measures will, of course, be controversial in some quarters.  They will certainly be contested by shariah-adherent Muslims committed to jihad and others who, in the name of exercising or protecting civil liberties, are enabling the destruction of those liberties in furtherance of shariah.  Far from being dispositive, their opposition should be seen as an opportunity – a chance, at a minimum, for a long-overdue debate about the sorts of policies that have brought the West in general and the United States in particular to the present, parlous state of affairs.  If this study catalyzes and usefully informs that debate, it will have succeeded. […]

Source(s):

William G. Boykin et al., Shariah: The Threat to America: An Exercise in Competitive Analysis (Washington, DC: Center for Security Policy, 2010), p. 34.