JEFFERSON CITY — Missouri House of Representative lawmakers debated legislation Wednesday that would prohibit courts from applying Shari’a law or certain foreign legal systems in the state.

House Bills 2139 and 2175 would create the “No Shari’a Act,” which would bar courts from enforcing foreign laws or religious codes that conflict with rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.

The identical bills are sponsored by Rep. Steve Jordan, R-Advance, and Rep. Chad Perkins, R-Bowling Green.

Jordan said the bills aim to ensure that foreign or religious legal systems do not override constitutional protections in Missouri.

“What we’re trying to do here is to stop any foreign law or religious law that does not fall within the Constitution of Missouri or the United States to be invoked on the people in the United States of America,” Jordan said. “It’s a pretty simple bill.”

Under the legislation, courts would be prohibited from enforcing rulings or contractual provisions that rely on Shari’a law or foreign legal systems if they conflict with constitutional rights. The bill would also void contracts that grant jurisdiction to foreign tribunals.

“I just want to try to stop the application of any foreign law, not just Shari’a, not just the Muslim law, to keep from superseding any state’s law or the United States Constitution,” Jordan said.

Perkins said he believes developments overseas could eventually reach the United States.

“You certainly see this becoming a trend in European countries,” Perkins said. “I think any reasonable person watching would say if that is the intent to do those in those European countries, that ultimately would be the intent to do it here.”

Several lawmakers raised concerns about the legislation and its potential effects.

Rep. Bridget Walsh Moore, D-St. Louis, said the measure is unnecessary.

“The First Amendment already prohibits U.S. courts from imposing religious law as civil law, so this measure is completely unnecessary,” Walsh Moore said. “Religions, freedom, equality, they’re fundamental values of the U.S. and the state of Missouri, so these principles are enshrined in our Constitution and it’s what makes our country great.”

Walsh Moore also argued the bill could also create unintended legal consequences.

“A couple married abroad moving to Missouri could have their marriage invalidated,” Walsh Moore said. “If we say their country’s laws on marriage aren’t as good as ours, so you could come here and have your marriage invalidated.”

Rep. Jeff Hales, D-St. Louis, questioned why the legislation singles out a specific religious legal tradition.

“I have a very Jewish community, orthodox community, follow Talmudic law or Halakha law. There’s also a Dharma law, Hindu and Buddhist law,” Hales said. “I don’t see where this should be singling out one. And I don’t think it frankly should be singling out any individual religious belief or laws.”

Rep. Colin Wellenkamp, R-St. Charles, said he represents a rapidly growing immigrant community and worries the bill could discourage participation in civic life.

“I want them to be open, I want them to contribute to our community,” Wellenkamp said. “Otherwise, if they feel like they need to solidify, there’s a risk of them concentrating their wealth inside their community instead of with the rest of my city.”

Religious leaders also weighed in during public testimony.

Brian Kaylor, a Baptist minister and president of Word&Way, a Christian nonprofit, urged lawmakers to reject the legislation.

“This legislation is bigotry in search of a problem,” Kaylor said. “The singling out the targeting of one religious tradition is highly problematic, and we should say no to that, because once we start threatening the religious liberty rights of one group by targeting like this, we put everyone’s religious liberty rights at risk.”

The bills remain in committee.