
How a Muslim housing plan in Texas became the target of right-wing hysteria
America is once again manufacturing a moral panic - this time over a neighbourhood that has not even been built.
In Texas, the mere proposal of EPIC City, a Muslim-friendly housing development spearheaded by the East Plano Islamic Centre (EPIC), has ignited a full-blown political and media firestorm.
It bears all the hallmarks of a familiar playbook: the "Ground Zero mosque" hysteria of 2010 reborn, weaponised by the same actors and fuelled by the same undercurrents of racism, Islamophobia and white nationalist anxiety.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott launched the initial salvo in February when he posted on X: "Sharia law is not allowed in Texas."
His post came shortly after Amy Mekelburg, a far-right agitator known for spreading anti-Muslim disinformation, falsely labelled the proposed development a "Sharia City". Rather than reject the smear, Abbott amplified it, treating Muslim families building homes as a threat to be taken seriously.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
A month later, on 25 March, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton followed suit, launching a formal investigation into EPIC City and demanding records from its developers and local officials.
Though framed as a routine legal step, the inquiry targeted supposed violations of state law - despite no evidence of illegality or any attempt to establish a parallel legal system. That did not stop Texas officials from invoking national security language to criminalise what is, in essence, a housing development.
Shortly after, Abbott escalated matters further, instructing the developers to confirm "within seven days that they are immediately ceasing any construction of their illegal project." It was a baseless demand that added fuel to an already manufactured panic.
Once again, Muslim presence is portrayed not as a right to be protected, but as a threat to be investigated
Two weeks later, on 8 April, Paxton announced his bid to unseat Republican Senator John Cornyn. The very next day, Cornyn called on the Department of Justice to investigate the project, echoing the same tired Islamophobic narrative under the guise of preventing "religious discrimination".
That both men seized on the same Muslim-led housing project to outflank each other in a hardline race to the right reveals just how cynically Muslims are being scapegoated. Once again, Muslim presence is portrayed not as a right to be protected, but as a threat to be investigated.
This isn't about zoning, infrastructure or legal compliance. It's about who is allowed to live together - and on what terms.
The backlash rests on an unspoken but deeply racist logic: that Muslims, by organising a community, are inherently suspicious. The mere act of coming together to live, worship and raise families is framed as threatening, as if Muslim presence itself destabilises the American social fabric.
Criminalising community
The EPIC City controversy offers a textbook case of how Islamophobia operates - not just as religious bigotry, but as a deeply racialised system of exclusion.
The idea that Muslims must prove their loyalty, civic virtue or moderation in order to build homes is not just insulting - it is dehumanising. It reduces Muslim life to a potential threat that must be surveilled, managed or neutralised.
A proposed housing development becomes a site of investigation. A mosque becomes a national security concern. A neighbourhood becomes a battlefield in a political campaign. None of this is new.
Fifteen years ago, Muslims attempting to build the Cordoba House (Park51) - an Islamic centre planned near the site of the 9/11 attacks in New York City - were met with similar outrage. Then, too, right-wing media, politicians and self-styled anti-Sharia activists mobilised fear and conspiracy to turn a local building project into a national threat.
The normalising of Islamophobia in UK public life is fuelling hate and violence Read More »
After years of pressure, the project was eventually abandoned, the property closed for demolition, and a luxury condominium was said to have been built on the site instead.
Today, what distinguishes the current backlash is how much more deeply it has been institutionalised - no longer limited to political rhetoric and media outrage, but carried out through formal government investigations and threats.
At the same time, this pattern of manufactured outrage reflects a broader strategy of cynical scapegoating aimed at winning elections, one that is not confined to the US.
In the UK, similar right-wing attacks on Muslim communities erupted during the 2024 general election, when figures like Nigel Farage and other far-right commentators stoked public outrage over unfounded claims that British Muslims were trying to create "no-go zones" or build separatist enclaves.
As in Texas, these conspiracies drew on long-standing Islamophobic tropes to cast Muslim civic participation as inherently threatening - and were used to rally electoral support by painting Muslims as an internal threat.
It also sits atop a long history of US policy, media narratives and imperial ventures that have conditioned the public to see Muslims - both at home and abroad - as problems to be managed or eliminated. From the surveillance of mosques and Guantanamo to Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) programmes and drone warfare, Muslims have been cast as both threat and test subject.
The hysteria now unfolding in Texas is just the latest chapter in that story - one more iteration of a post-9/11 machinery that never stopped running.
A cruel irony
This broader context of anti-Muslim fear-mongering takes on a particularly cruel dimension in the case of EPIC City.
The developers have emphasised that the community would serve, in part, as a refuge for Afghan families seeking peace and stability after fleeing war.
But the war in question was not simply an unfortunate reality - it was engineered and sustained by the very US government now portraying their presence as a potential threat. The same government that destabilised their homelands now questions their presence in suburban Texas.
The cognitive dissonance would be laughable if it were not so dangerous.
And that danger is not theoretical. The climate of incitement that fuels this outrage has already resulted in hate-fuelled violence. From mosque vandalism to the October 2023 murder of six-year-old Wadea al-Fayoume in Illinois, and the December 2024 Magdeburg Christmas market attack in Germany, Islamophobic rhetoric routinely spills over into real-world harm.
Hate has consequences.
All of the anti-Muslim bigotry being spread by the Far Right in Texas for the last few weeks is not only slanderous, it is dangerous.
In Houston, TX, twenty kids in Paul Revere Middle School ganged up against three Afghan refugee girls who were wearing… pic.twitter.com/rpgp2F1moE — Dr. Yasir Qadhi (@YasirQadhi) April 10, 2025
When state officials signal that Muslim projects are suspect - when governors imply that building homes might be part of a foreign conspiracy - they legitimise and embolden the most hateful elements in society.
But this time, something different is also happening: resistance. Earlier this month, Muslim and Jewish community leaders came together at a joint press conference to condemn the investigations into EPIC City.
Their message was clear: this is not just a Muslim issue, it is a civil rights issue. It is about religious freedom, equal protection, and the right of all people to organise their lives without state harassment or vilification.
This interfaith solidarity matters. In a climate where Muslims are often isolated and scapegoated, standing together with other marginalised groups - particularly those with their own histories of discrimination - can help disrupt the narrative that Muslim communities are "other" or uniquely threatening.
It also reminds us that the real battle is not just over one project, but over the kind of society we want to live in.
A defining test
Even as solidarity grows, we must be careful not to sanitise this moment. Interfaith alliances are valuable, but they must not distract from the underlying systems that entrench racial and religious repression.
Zionism, as a system of political and institutional power, has helped shape both foreign and domestic policies that criminalise Muslim identity and suppress dissent, particularly through the Islamophobia network and pro-Israel organisations like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).
In 2010, the ADL was among the most vocal groups to oppose the Cordoba House project, helping to fuel a wave of Islamophobic hysteria that had already gripped much of the country.
Interfaith alliances are valuable, but they must not distract from the underlying systems that entrench racial and religious repression
More than a decade later, its CEO, Jonathan Greenblatt, issued an apology, calling that stance a mistake. But the retraction came long after the damage was done - and amid the organisation's continued support for policies that dehumanise Palestinians and reinforce Islamophobic narratives.
In 2023, a coalition of more than 60 Muslim, Arab and allied groups condemned the ADL for fuelling anti-Palestinian hate, citing its platforming of anti-Muslim speakers and defence of Israeli state violence. This should serve as a reminder that principled solidarity requires discernment: we cannot afford to lean on groups complicit in the very systems we are struggling to dismantle.
The EPIC City controversy, like those before it, whether in the UK, New York, or across Europe, is not a legal puzzle or a PR crisis - it is a test. A test of whether the US will continue to treat Muslim presence as inherently suspicious, or whether it will finally begin to live up to the constitutional principles it claims to uphold. A test of whether American Muslims will be allowed to flourish on their own terms - or only under conditions of constant apology, appeasement and oversight.
As with the Ground Zero mosque, this may not end well. But this time, the outrage is being met not just with silence or surrender, but with solidarity, critique and resistance. That alone is worth paying attention to - and building on.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Middle East Eye
6 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Trump says Iran's proposal 'unacceptable' as Tehran touts intel on Israeli nukes
Iran's response to a US nuclear deal proposal is 'unacceptable', President Donald Trump said on Monday, adding that Iran was 'asking for things you can't do'. 'They don't want to have to give up what they have to give up. They seek enrichment. We want just the opposite,' Trump said during a business round table. Earlier in the day, he spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump said the two leaders' conversation was mainly about Iran. 'So far, they (Iran) aren't there. I hate to say that…They have given us their thoughts on the deal, and I said, 'it's just not acceptable.'' Trump's pessimistic tone is in stark contrast to his assessment of the nuclear talks in May. He previously said he asked Netanyahu not to launch preemptive strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities because he believed the US was close to a 'solution'. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The US and Iran have held five rounds of talks since April to thrash out a new nuclear accord to replace the 2015 deal called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which Trump unilaterally withdrew from during his first term in 2018. Trump, who prides himself on being a 'dealmaker', laughed about going toe-to-toe with the Iranians. His envoy, Steve Witkoff, met directly with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi during the talks, although the discussions were mediated by Oman. 'They (Iranians) are good negotiators, but they are tough. Sometimes they can be too tough. That's the problem,' Trump said. Trump said the next round of talks will take place on Thursday. Trump's comments come as all sides, the US, Iran and Israel, appear to be positioning themselves for different scenarios depending on how the talks progress. Iran touts Israel nuclear intelligence leak On Saturday, Iranian state media reported that Tehran had obtained a trove of "strategic and sensitive" Israeli intelligence in a covert operation, including files related to Israel's undeclared nuclear programme and defence plans. Israel is widely understood to have nuclear weapons, although it doesn't admit it. Iran's top security body said on Monday that, using intelligence it had obtained about Israeli nuclear facilities, Iranian forces could launch counterattacks - should Israel strike the Islamic Republic. Saudi Arabian and Omani officials propose nuclear facilities for Iran on Gulf island: Report Read More » Iran insists its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes. After Trump withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal, Iran ramped up uranium enrichment to 60 percent. US officials have said that Iran is weeks away from enriching uranium to the 90 percent level that would be needed for weaponisation. Iran would then have to construct a nuclear weapon, which could take months. Trump's comments on Monday suggest that he is pursuing a deal that would stop all Iranian enrichment - a red line for the Islamic Republic. Reports in Axios and The New York Times earlier this month said the White House may concede to a low level of enrichment by Iran, perhaps temporarily. The US provided Iran with a proposal for a nuclear deal on 31 May. On Monday, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei criticised the US proposal as "lacking elements" reflective of the previous rounds of negotiations. "We will soon submit our own proposed plan to the other side through (mediator) Oman once it is finalised," Baqaei told a weekly press briefing. "It is a proposal that is reasonable, logical and balanced, and we strongly recommend that the American side value this opportunity.' Iran's parliament speaker has said the US proposal failed to include the lifting of sanctions, a key demand for Tehran, which has been reeling under their weight for years. Trump imposed debilitating sanctions on Iran in 2018. Is Trump holding back Israel from attacking? A steady stream of media leaks suggests that Israel is prepared to unilaterally bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, potentially alone. What is stopping Israel from bombing Iran's nuclear sites? Read More » One senior US official previously told Middle East Eye on the condition of anonymity that the Trump administration has been impressed by plans Israel shared with it that lay out unilateral strikes against Iran's nuclear programme without direct American involvement. The plans were discussed in April and May with CIA director John Ratcliffe. But analysts and former US and Israeli officials say Israel is unlikely to defy Trump's request to stand down. They say Netanyahu would like to share political responsibility with the US for attacking Iran if something goes wrong. He is also afraid Trump may not provide an American military backstop, given his recent ceasefire with the Houthis in Yemen that excluded Israel. In 2024, the US intervened directly to shoot down Iranian missiles and drones fired at Israel during two unprecedented direct exchanges of fire between the Middle East foes. Trump himself is under conflicting pressures. He has purged his administration of pro-Israel hawks like former national security advisor Mike Waltz and, more recently, lower-level officials like Merav Ceren, the National Security Council director for Israel and Iran. Ceren came in the crosshairs of pro-Trump "America First" commentators, but analysts say officials like her likely have little influence in a White House where Trump has consolidated decision-making down to all but his closest advisors. Iran has been the most active in positioning itself for the next round of talks.

Middle East Eye
6 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
What to know about the new Trump travel ban now in effect
US President Donald Trump's new travel ban went into effect on Monday, to far less mobilisation and criticism than the first time around, in 2017. With a bigger mandate this time, and relatively high approval ratings for his immigration policy, Trump's new travel ban has not just expanded, it's also on far more solid legal footing, immigration lawyers told Middle East Eye. The executive order targets 12 countries: Afghanistan; Burma; Chad; the Republic of the Congo; Equatorial Guinea; Eritrea; Haiti; Iran; Libya; Somalia; Sudan; and Yemen. Additionally, nationals from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela will be partially restricted. Those already inside the US are exempt. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters For those abroad at the time the ban went into effect, they may enter the country if they are green card holders, preauthorised visa holders, preauthorised refugee claimants, dual citizens where one of the countries is not included in the travel ban, or if they are the immediate family members of a US citizen. Still, increased scrutiny at ports of entry and orders from Secretary of State Marco Rubio could lead to visa revocations by a border agent. The administration has made it clear that no person is entitled to entry into the US, apart from US citizens. The White House said the ban, as well as heightened vetting measures, is necessary because of excessive visa overstays, which the Trump administration says is a national security concern because it could lead to "terrorist" activity. 'We don't want them': countries facing travel ban to US Read More » The ban was initially expected back in March, but was only introduced following an attack by an Egyptian national on a pro-Israeli march in Colorado last week. "This is definitely a Muslim ban couched in language that the Trump administration knows how to get around as it pertains to the courts," Haris Tarin, the vice president of policy and programming at the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), told MEE. "There was a lot of online chatter - especially by the Laura Loomers and the Randy Fines - these intense Islamophobes in Congress and supporters of the administration who basically said Muslims are responsible for this, and that they needed to ban the Muslim Brotherhood and that they needed to have travel bans," he added. The administration "already spooked so many people from coming into this country... with the detention of students, with the detention of tourists," Tarin said. "This was the perfect time to go even further." 'Anxious, desperate, exhausted' Unlike the 2017 ban, this one is likely to remain in effect in its current form, Hassan M Ahmed, managing attorney at the HMA Law Firm, told MEE. "It's clear that a lot more thought went into this version of it. It seems that they learned their lessons from the previous iterations," Ahmed said, referring to the persistent challenges they faced in court. In a precedent-setting decision in late 2017, the US Supreme Court maintained that the president did not violate the First Amendment with his so-called Muslim Ban, and was well within his rights to determine what is in the national security interest. The Court also said there was no anti-Muslim animus in the ban, simply because many other Muslim countries were not targeted. "Anytime a policy changes, whether for good or for bad, we get an increase in phone calls," Ahmed said. "In this case, we're dealing not just with a change in policy, but there's sort of a psychological aspect to a lot of the administration's offensive policies, and that creates a great deal of uncertainty." On those phone calls are people who are "anxious, desperate, and exhausted", Ahmed told MEE. "Unfortunately, given the track record of open defiance of court orders and lawlessness that's become sort of emblematic of this administration, sometimes we as lawyers are at a loss [and unable] to tell clients that they don't have anything to worry about." Laila Ayub, an immigration attorney and co-founder of Project ANAR, which assists in the resettlement of Afghan refugees, said the climate of fear is deeply pervasive among the community she works with. "Everyone who's already here started contacting us, thinking they're now at risk of deportation just because of their nationality, which is not actually the reality," Ayub told MEE. "So there is a lot of opportunity still to empower people with information about their rights." "The number one question, though, that people have always despite their situation when they are in here in the US, is when they can reunite with their family. That is really something that will be impacted by the travel ban." Impact on visas While advocacy groups have been pleading with the Trump administration for months to make an exemption for Special Immigrant Visas for Afghans who aided American soldiers between 2001 and 2021, there is such a carveout. Still, the visa does not include everyone who worked for or who worked closely with the US during their presence in Afghanistan, Ayub said. Mirriam Sediq, who runs Seddiq Law Maryland, told MEE that previously "lawful categories for Afghans" now suddenly no longer exist. "There are people that came to the US in 2021, 2022 through humanitarian parole. There are also those who have [Temporary Protected Status]. And TPS has been ended for Afghans, so they're really left in a completely no man's land right now." Handful of US lawmakers demand Trump ban the Muslim Brotherhood Read More » Seddiq said she feels "super betrayed by this idea that we've told our clients to do [the right] things" in terms of entering legally and maintaining a law-abiding presence, yet "they're walking directly into the lion's den when they do it". Among other actions, the Trump administration has sent Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to courthouses around the country to arrest largely undocumented immigrants who are appearing for their immigration court date, just as the government asked them to. This, Seddiq said, was always standard practice: as long as an immigrant did regular check-ins with ICE agents and showed up in front of a judge and violated no laws, they could carry on with their lives in the US. Now, they're being taken away from their US-born children to be detained and then deported. "We've allowed people to enter even when they don't have a pathway forward. And this is where we are," Seddiq told MEE. "But we've been here for decades and decades and decades, and we've asked for major immigration reform, major overhauls, maybe even some sort of amnesty for people who are doing all the right things. And there's never the political will to do it." Legislative change Despite a much more muted societal reaction compared to 2017, civil liberties groups and immigrant advocacy organisations are working on ways to respond to the new Trump travel ban. The public that took to the streets eight years ago is simply too exhausted this time, Tarin told MEE. "People have been responding to students being kidnapped off the streets by ICE. People have been mobilising to try to support students on student visas. Lawyers have tried to mobilise around protecting students on college campuses," he said. But that's also a strategy the administration has employed. "The way advocates organise is they take one issue at a time and they organise around it, and that's how they're successful. And so if you throw 15 issues at them, they won't be able to respond," Tarin said. In the immediate term, MPAC is putting together a network of lawyers that can be accessed in case of emergencies where otherwise legal entrants to the US are stuck at airports or put into detention. However, the group is also eyeing the 2026 midterm elections, when members of the House and Senate will be up for reelection, and Democrats may stand a chance of gaining a majority of seats in both chambers. MPAC is pushing for traction on the NO BAN Act so that if Democrats take control of Congress, there is an opportunity to make the bill a law. The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives in February by Democratic Congresswoman Judy Chu of California. It aims to limit Trump's authority to ban an entire class of foreigners - or "aliens" as they are called in the US - from arriving in the country, and demands that Rubio provide lawmakers with reports on the number of denied visitors. For the time being, people will "always try" to come to the US anyway, Seddiq said. "I am loath to tell anybody that the United States is closed the way the administration wants to seemingly advertise to the world. I think that where there's a will, there's a way, and frequently, when you're dealing with immigration, the key to success is merely standing up one more time when you're knocked down," Ahmed said.

Middle East Eye
11 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Madleen: Social media users slam Israel's 'mocking' of Gaza flotilla activists
The Israeli military seized a charity vessel carrying international activists attempting to break the blockade of the Gaza Strip in the early hours of Monday. Israeli soldiers boarded the Madleen and ordered the 12 international activists - including Swedish climate compaigner Greta Thunberg and member of the European Parliament from France, Rima Hassan - to throw their phones into the sea before filming themselves handing out sandwiches and bottles of water in series of clips and posts shared on social media saying the "show was over". Social media users slammed Israel's move as a political stunt and used its labelling of the humanitarian vessel as a "selfie yacht' in a series of social media posts to highlight selfies taken by Israeli soldiers while committing abuses in the war-torn Palestinian enclave. Several people shared widely circulated selfies and photos taken by Israeli soldiers themselves, some of which depict potential war crimes. Others responded to the Israeli government's posts with the hashtag #selfiegenocide. 'Israel calls the Madleen a 'selfie yacht' while their soldiers snap selfies with war crimes. Hypocrites!' wrote one social media user. "Wild to go with the 'selfie' thing when your own cowardly soldiers have been uploading their war crimes to social media all through the genocide," another posted. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Several people criticised Israel for mocking a humanitarian mission and accused the government of staging the moment soldiers handed out sandwiches for propaganda purposes. Not sure 'selfie yacht' is the best talking point for a country whose soldiers routinely take photos of themselves with the underwear of dead/displaced Palestinian women. — Daniel Wickham (@DanielWickham93) June 9, 2025 "Israel is mocking a ship that is bringing humanitarian aid to a population that they are deliberately starving," posted one person. "Since the IOF (Israeli army) is putting out propaganda videos to show everyone 'hey look at how nice we are we gave them a sammie!' I'd like to remind everyone the reason the Madleen was going there in the first place was to break the siege on the Palestinians they've been STARVING FOR MONTHS!" another person added. Another said, 'This was a humanitarian mission. Stopping a civilian aid boat in international waters is both illegal and immoral. Posting a video saying 'we gave them sandwiches and water, the show is over' is not diplomacy—it's a PR stunt." I thought Israel doesn't occupy Gaza and here it is deciding who and what can enter the borders of Gaza 🤔 Also it's actually a violation of international law to kidnap unarmed civilians. I mean it's not as if you care about law since you're starving 2 million people you keep… — Isabelle (@Darkiora) June 9, 2025 Beyond social media, Madleen's seizure has drawn condemnation from legal experts, rights groups and international observers. Amnesty International's secretary general, Agnes Callamard, denounced Israel's interception of Madleen as a 'violation of international law'. #Madleen, launched by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC), was seeking to bring humanitarian aid in an attempt to breach Israel's illegal blockade of the occupied Gaza Strip. It was carrying unarmed civilians on a humanitarian mission. Israel interception of Madleen violates… — Agnes Callamard (@AgnesCallamard) June 9, 2025 Palestinian rights organisation Al-Haq condemned Israel's "unlawful interception" and demanded the immediate release of all detained activists, asserting: "Israel has no legal authority to restrict access to Palestine, since such is within the exclusive right of the Palestinian people." UK MP Zarah Sultana described the activists aboard the Madleen as 'heroes', calling Israel's actions a 'flagrant breach of international law' and urging the UK government to 'sanction Israel, end all arms and surveillance deals, and expel its ambassador'. Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory, said the UK government should take action to secure the British-flagged ship and called on "every Mediterranean port" to send boats with aid in an act of solidarity with Gaza. "They shall sail together—united, they will be unstoppable. #BreakingTheSiege is a legal duty for states, and a moral imperative for all of us," she said on X.