In the long American story of who belongs and who is trusted to govern, Abdul El-Sayed's 2018 confrontation with Patrick Colbeck over alleged Muslim Brotherhood ties stands as a revealing chapter. A candidate's student organization membership from 2007 became the basis for sweeping accusations about civilizational loyalty, prompting El-Sayed to anchor his defense not in biography but in constitutional oath. The exchange, now resurfacing as El-Sayed seeks a Michigan Senate seat, reminds us that questions of religious identity and political fitness remain unresolved tensions in the American demo
El-Sayed fires back at Muslim Brotherhood allegations in unearthed 2018 clip
Sharia law is not in question in this state.
Mark
So what exactly was Colbeck claiming El-Sayed had done?
Mimi
He was connecting El-Sayed's past role as vice president of the Muslim Students Association at Michigan to the Muslim Brotherhood—specifically citing a strategy memo that listed the MSA among many organizations.
Luke
But did Fox News actually find evidence of a connection between El-Sayed and the Muslim Brotherhood?
Mimi
No. They explicitly state they found no tie. The memo lists dozens of groups, most of which don't have formal relationships with the Brotherhood.
Mark
What was El-Sayed's response to all this?
Mimi
He made two moves. First, he said something sharp—that Muslims hate Colbeck. Then he pivoted to his constitutional oath, saying he'd swear to uphold the Constitution and that Sharia law wasn't a question in Michigan.
Luke
Is there any actual evidence El-Sayed has proposed implementing Sharia law?
Mimi
No. His campaign says he believes in separation of church and state and opposes any religious community writing its laws into national law.
Mark
Why does this matter now, eight years later?
Mimi
Because it's part of a larger political conversation about Muslim representation in American politics and whether religious identity should disqualify candidates.
Luke
But the real question is whether these concerns are based on what El-Sayed has actually said or done, or whether they're based on guilt by association with organizations he was tangentially connected to as a student.
Mimi
That's the tension the 2018 exchange exposed—and it's still unresolved.
The Pulse
- Colbeck's invocation of 'civilization jihad' transformed a decades-old student leadership role into a live accusation of subversive intent, raising the stakes of the forum far beyond ordinary policy debate.
- El-Sayed's retort — that Muslims 'definitely hate' Colbeck — cut through the procedural framing and made the personal cost of such allegations visible and visceral.
- Despite the inflammatory framing, Fox News found no direct evidence linking El-Sayed to the Muslim Brotherhood, exposing how guilt-by-association arguments can outpace the facts that underpin them.
- El-Sayed's campaign has since worked to reframe the conversation around constitutional principle and the separation of church and state, attempting to shift the ground from suspicion to civic affirmation.
- The clip's resurgence in 2026 signals that the underlying anxieties — about Muslim representation, Sharia law, and American identity — have not dissipated but deepened, now amplified by figures like Rep. Chip Roy and local voices in Dearborn.
In the long American story of who belongs and who is trusted to govern, Abdul El-Sayed's 2018 confrontation with Patrick Colbeck over alleged Muslim Brotherhood ties stands as a revealing chapter. A candidate's student organization membership from 2007 became the basis for sweeping accusations about civilizational loyalty, prompting El-Sayed to anchor his defense not in biography but in constitutional oath. The exchange, now resurfacing as El-Sayed seeks a Michigan Senate seat, reminds us that questions of religious identity and political fitness remain unresolved tensions in the American democratic experiment.
When Abdul El-Sayed faced Republican rival Patrick Colbeck at a 2018 Michigan gubernatorial forum, the exchange quickly moved past policy into something more charged. Colbeck pressed El-Sayed on his 2007 role as vice president of the Muslim Students Association at the University of Michigan, framing the affiliation through the lens of a Muslim Brotherhood strategy document that had listed the MSA alongside dozens of other Muslim organizations. The implication was clear, even if the evidence was thin.
El-Sayed's response came in two registers. First, a sharp personal rebuke directed at Colbeck. Then, a constitutional pivot: if elected, he said, he would swear an oath to uphold both the U.S. and Michigan constitutions — an oath he took seriously precisely because it protected his own right to worship. 'Sharia law is not in question in this state,' he said plainly. Fox News found no direct ties between El-Sayed and the Muslim Brotherhood, and his campaign has since affirmed his opposition to embedding any religious doctrine into law.
The Muslim Brotherhood, while not designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. government, has been listed as such by several nations and continues to advocate for Islamic law in national governance — context that lends the accusations a surface plausibility even without direct evidence. Meanwhile, broader anxieties about Sharia law's influence in American life have found expression in figures like Rep. Chip Roy and in local disputes in Dearborn, Michigan, where a large Muslim population has prompted some residents and clergy to claim the city has drifted from American legal norms.
Now running for Michigan's U.S. Senate seat, El-Sayed finds that eight-year-old forum clip circulating again. It has become a kind of shorthand for the larger, unresolved question his candidacy poses: how American democracy navigates the intersection of religious identity, political loyalty, and the enduring suspicion that some faiths carry a heavier burden of proof than others.
Abdul El-Sayed, now the Democratic nominee for Michigan's U.S. Senate seat, faced direct questioning about his Muslim faith and alleged ties to Islamic organizations during a 2018 gubernatorial forum. His rival that year, Republican Patrick Colbeck, pressed him on connections to the Muslim Students Association at the University of Michigan, where El-Sayed had served as vice president as a senior in 2007. Colbeck framed the line of inquiry in stark terms, invoking what he called "civilization jihad" and pointing to a strategy memorandum written by a Muslim Brotherhood member that listed the MSA among various Muslim organizations.
El-Sayed's response was sharp and direct. When asked whether Sharia law posed a real concern for Michigan, he pivoted to his constitutional obligations. He stated plainly that if elected, he would swear an oath to uphold both the U.S. Constitution and Michigan's state constitution—an oath he said he took "particularly seriously" because it guaranteed his own right to worship freely. "Sharia law is not in question in this state," he added. But before that measured answer came a more pointed remark: "Now, you may not hate Muslims," El-Sayed said to Colbeck. "But I'll tell you, Muslims definitely hate you."
The exchange reflects a recurring tension in American politics over how Muslim candidates are vetted. Colbeck's allegations hinged on El-Sayed's past affiliation with the MSA, a student organization that appeared in a decades-old Muslim Brotherhood strategy document alongside dozens of other groups—from the Islamic Book Service to the Association of Muslim Scientists and Engineers. Fox News Digital found no evidence of direct ties between El-Sayed and the Muslim Brotherhood itself. The organization, while not designated as terrorist by the U.S. government, has been formally listed as such by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Russia. The Muslim Brotherhood renounced violence in the 1970s but has continued to advocate for incorporating Islamic law into national legal systems.
El-Sayed's campaign has since clarified his position on the separation of church and state. A spokesperson told the Washington Free Beacon that while El-Sayed personally observes his faith, as many Americans of various religions do, he opposes any effort by any religious community to embed its doctrines into national law. Fox News Digital is not aware of any proposals from El-Sayed to implement aspects of Sharia law.
The broader concern about Sharia law's potential influence in American governance has gained traction among some Republican lawmakers. Representative Chip Roy of Texas issued a 2025 statement warning of what he characterized as a threat to the Constitution and Western values, citing instances of what he described as Sharia adherents and alleged sleeper cells connected to terrorist organizations. In Dearborn, Michigan, where roughly 54.5 percent of residents reported Middle Eastern or North African ancestry according to the 2020 census, the growing Muslim population has prompted some local critics to argue that the city operates under Islamic rather than American law. Pastor Lorenzo Sewell of 180 Church told the town council that Dearborn had been lost to Sharia law and called on council members to denounce it.
The 2018 forum exchange between El-Sayed and Colbeck captures a moment when these anxieties collided with a candidate's effort to establish his commitment to American constitutional principles. El-Sayed's response—both the sharp retort and the constitutional affirmation—became a marker of how he would address such questions as his political profile rose. Now, as he seeks a Senate seat, that eight-year-old clip resurfaces as part of the ongoing debate over religious identity and political loyalty in American elections.
Notable Quotes
Now, you may not hate Muslims. But I'll tell you, Muslims definitely hate you.— Abdul El-Sayed, responding to Patrick Colbeck at 2018 Michigan gubernatorial forum
I solemnly swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this state—that's the oath that if any one of us is elected, we will swear.— Abdul El-Sayed, at 2018 forum
Want the full story?
Read the original at Fox News ↗