Abdul El-Sayed makes history as America’s first Muslim senator: A blow to Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric?

Using religious identity as a political weapon to spread hostility is hardly new in American politics. Particularly since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, suspicion surrounding Muslim identity, questions of national security and anti-Muslim rhetoric have become familiar instruments of political mobilisation in the United States. Against this backdrop, an important political development unfolded in the 2026 US midterm elections. Democrat Abdul El-Sayed defeated Republican candidate Mike Rogers in Michigan’s Senate race, becoming the first Muslim American elected to the US Senate.

Ahead of the election, US President Donald Trump and several leaders of his party openly campaigned against El-Sayed, resorting to anti-Muslim rhetoric. They sought to portray him as a threat to American national security by foregrounding his religious identity. He was even accused of having links to the Muslim Brotherhood, a militant organisation. Despite these attacks, Michigan voters chose to elect him.

El-Sayed’s victory is therefore historic in terms of the political representation of Muslim Americans. It also sends an important message against a brand of politics that seeks to turn religious prejudice into a central instrument of electoral campaigning.

From medicine to the political arena

Forty-two-year-old Abdul El-Sayed has a professional and political background that makes his emergence particularly significant. Born in Michigan, he is the son of Egyptian immigrants. A physician and public health expert, El-Sayed previously headed the health departments of Detroit and Wayne County. His experience in public health administration brought him into direct contact with the challenges of healthcare access, poverty and social inequality.

Politically, he is associated with the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. He has long advocated universal healthcare, higher taxes on billionaires, curbing corporate influence in politics and ending American military interventions abroad. One of the central promises of his election campaign was to ensure that access to healthcare should not depend on an individual's financial circumstances. He supports the 'Medicare for All' programme, which seeks to guarantee government-funded healthcare for every American.

El-Sayed argues that taxpayers' money should be spent on improving education, healthcare and infrastructure at home. It should not be used to wage wars abroad or drop bombs on people in other countries. These economic and social concerns occupied a central place in his election campaign.

Trump's anti-Muslim campaign

The most contentious aspect of El-Sayed's electoral battle was the Republican campaign targeting his religious identity. Donald Trump repeatedly attacked him at public rallies, calling him a 'jihadist'. Trump even claimed that if El-Sayed entered the Senate, he would have to pass through a metal detector.

Republican campaigners also accused him of being a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz levelled similar allegations against him. El-Sayed, however, categorically stated that he had never been a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and never would be. No credible evidence of any association between him and the organisation was presented.

Since the September 11 attacks, American politics has witnessed a tendency to conflate Muslim identity with terrorism. This tendency has repeatedly been exploited to portray political opponents as unpatriotic or threats to national security. The same old political strategy was deployed against El-Sayed.

During his campaign in Michigan, Trump invoked the September 11 attacks and United Airlines Flight 93. His remarks were intended to create the impression that El-Sayed's entry into the Senate could endanger American security. Yet there was no credible evidence linking the Democratic candidate to any terrorist organisation.

El-Sayed was not the only one to protest against these attacks. Sections of the Arab-American community also criticised Trump's remarks. Bishara Bahbah, founder of an organisation that had once played an important role in mobilising Arab-American support for Trump, described the President's comments as racist. He argued that attacking someone on the basis of their religious identity was unacceptable.

Opposition within his own party

El-Sayed's political battle was not confined to the Republicans. His candidature also encountered resistance within the Democratic Party. In the party's August 2026 primary, he defeated Haley Stevens, a relatively moderate Democratic candidate. His victory signalled the growing influence of the progressive wing within the party.

However, Stevens continued to oppose him even after losing the primary. Just two days before the general election, she disregarded party allegiance and endorsed Republican candidate Mike Rogers. Stevens had raised objections to El-Sayed's position on Israel and his association with political commentator Hasan Piker.

El-Sayed's opposition to American military assistance to Israel had also generated considerable controversy within the Democratic Party. His position on Israel's military operations in Gaza and the role of the US government was unequivocal. He criticised Israel's military campaign and called for an end to American financial and military assistance.

Because of this position, the pro-Israel political lobby AIPAC campaigned against him. A super PAC associated with AIPAC spent a substantial amount of money to prevent his nomination in the Democratic primary. Consequently, El-Sayed's struggle extended far beyond the contest between two political parties. Disagreements over Israel in American domestic politics, the influence of corporate money and the future of progressive politics all became intertwined with this election.

El-Sayed, however, did not want his religious identity to become the defining feature of his campaign. Instead, he placed issues such as the rising cost of living, healthcare, employment and corporate influence at the forefront.

Inflation, rising fuel prices and the enormous cost of healthcare remain major concerns for ordinary Americans. El-Sayed sought to establish a connection between these problems, the policies of the Trump administration and corporate interests. His opponent, Mike Rogers, was a former military serviceman, former FBI official and seven-term member of Congress. He contested the election with Trump's backing. El-Sayed, however, sought to portray him as a representative of Trump's political agenda.

The effectiveness of this strategy in Michigan is reflected in El-Sayed's victory. Nevertheless, it would be simplistic to interpret the result solely as a vote against Islamophobia. Economic discontent, the popularity of the Trump administration, the war in Iran and trade policies also influenced voters' decisions.

First question of political representation in America

First, the election of a Muslim candidate to the US Senate is a historic milestone for political representation in a country like the United States. Second, despite using religious prejudice as a political weapon against him, the Republicans failed to defeat him. Third, his victory has demonstrated that progressive politics within the Democratic Party can still translate into electoral success.

Following his victory, El-Sayed said that America's greatness did not lie in denying its weaknesses but in having the courage to address them. He argued that taxpayers' money should be spent on improving the lives of Americans and their children, not on dropping bombs on children in other countries.

However, the election of a Muslim candidate does not mean that Islamophobia has disappeared from American society. The nature of the campaign against El-Sayed has once again exposed the deep-rooted religious and ethnic divisions within American politics. Yet his victory, secured despite such attacks, has demonstrated one thing clearly: Muslim identity cannot be established as a measure of political disqualification.

The outcome represents a political contest in which, alongside religious identity, questions of public healthcare, the economy, social justice and opposition to war also emerged as central themes of electoral debate.