The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group that advocates for the spread of Islam, is calling on Ben Carson to withdraw from the presidential election for stating that Islam is “inconsistent” with the Constitution.

“I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation,” Carson said on Sunday’s Meet The Press. Islam, Carson explained, is “inconsistent with the values of America” and the U.S. Constitution.

Polling data indicates that Carson’s point is not without merit. According to the Pew Research Center, a majority of Muslims throughout South Asia, sub-Saharan African, the Middle East and North Africa favor “making Sharia the official law of the land.” Earlier this year, filmmaker Ami Horowitz interviewed Muslim residents of the Cedar Riverside section of Minneapolis, many of whom said that they would prefer to live under Sharia law.

One boy who was interviewed explained that he would rather live under Sharia law because it would promote safer communities: “Sharia law, it says that if you steal something, they cut off your hand,” the boy explained. “So, basically, [people] can leave their doors open. Nobody’s going to steal anything because Sharia is so tight.”

By definition, Sharia law contradicts the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and the separation of church and state.

Moreover, the natural-born-citizen clause of the Constitution would bar the vast majority of adult Muslim-U.S. residents from serving as commander-in-chief, according to 2011 data from Pew Research Center. Because only about a one third of the U.S. Muslim adult population was born in the United States, 63 percent of adult U.S. Muslims would be ineligible to serve as President.

As the Harvard Law Review has documented, the original purpose of the natural born citizenship clause was clearly laid out in a letter from John Jay to George Washington, in which Jay asks:

“[W]hether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a… strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in chief of the american [sic] army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen”

In essence, the Founding Fathers were worried that even a British-born diplomat might be too foreign to run the country. Carson is suggesting the same may be true of a Sharia-compliant son of Somali refugees.

Carson’s assertion, however, has received strong criticism from the Islam expansion groups. CAIR announced that it will be holding a news conference demanding Carson’s withdraw from the race. “We call on our nation’s political leaders – across the political spectrum – to repudiate these unconstitutional and un-American statements and for Mr. Carson to withdraw from the presidential race,” said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad.

CAIR had similarly strong words for GOP frontrunner Donald Trump because Trump refused to forcibly silence and embarrass a supporter who asked Trump how he plans to combat terrorist training camps in the United States.

The billionaire’s refusal to publically berate the blue-collar questioner John-McCain-style, “sent the message that Islamophobia is acceptable,” declared CAIR Government Affairs Manager, Robert McCaw.

This, however, is not the only issue upon which CAIR disagrees with Donald Trump. CAIR, which critics have described as a “Muslim Brotherhood front group” with a “solicitous stance toward accused terrorists“, has similarly called for mass increases in the number of Muslim refugees admitted to the United States—on top of the tens of thousands of refugees the United States already admits annually. Donald Trump has argued that Muslim countries– not the United States– should be willing to take in some of the Muslim migrants.

On September 13th, the St. Louis chapter of CAIR co-sponsored a “Bring Them Here” march calling for the admission of even more Muslim migrants into the United States. The local CAIR chapter is pushing the United States to open its borders to all Muslim refugees who would like to be admitted, KMOV-TV St. Louis reports. “Organizers, in fact, say the U.S. should not even stop at ten thousand [additional refugees]. They’re pushing for St. Louis to open its doors to any and all refugees who would like to come here.”

At the same time that CAIR and other political Islam groups want to flood Western countries with Muslim migrants, they have no condemnation for the Islamist values and principles that have plunged one of the most world’s populous regions despair. “Either we let them in, or we take the statue of liberty down,” declared Faizan Syed, executive director of the St. Louis CAIR chapter told KMOV-TV.

Experts warn that such a policy would allow for the admission of Islamic extremists who wish to commit acts of terror on Western soil.

Chairman of the House Counterterrorism and Intelligence Subcommittee, Rep. Peter King (R-NY)  has explained that there is, “no real way of vetting, to any extent, these refugees coming in.” King’s warning echoes that of FBI Counterterrorism Assistant Director Michael Steinbach, who earlier this year said it is impossible to do background checks on the refugees because Syria, “a failed state, does not have any infrastructure so to speak. So all the data sets, the police, the intel services, that you would normally go to and seek that information, don’t exist.”

Moreover, as the explosion of ISIS recruitment in Minnesota’s little Mogadishu has demonstrated, even if Sharia-law supporting Muslims were not explicitly enrolled in terror groups prior to their entry into the United States, there is nothing preventing them from striking out violently against the Western culture they view as oppressive once they are admitted into the United States. Opponents of relocating millions of Muslims into the West worry that they will bring with them the same violence, balkanization and failed political systems that their religion created throughout the Middle East.

Not all Republican candidates, however, are opposed to CAIR’s American-Islam expansion agenda. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), for instance, has proposed policies and legislation which would add substantially to CAIRs ranks.

Every year the United States voluntarily imports more than a quarter of a million– or 280,000– Muslim migrants (this number includes 117,423 migrants who were permanently resettled with Legal Permanent Resident status, as well as an additional 122,921 temporary Muslim workers and foreign students, and 39,932 Muslim refugee and asylees). This means that each year, the U.S. admits a number of Muslim migrants larger in size than the entire population of Des Moines, Iowa. The United States accepts at least 300 times more Muslim migrants than Mexico.

Yet Marco Rubio believes that number should be even greater.

Rubio is running on a platform of reducing labor costs for corporations and increasing diversity—or what he calls a New American Century.

Importing millions of poor migrants from failed and developing nations will enrich the country with the more diverse languages, vibrant classrooms, colorful neighborhoods, and a wider array of cultural values– allowing the United States to fulfill its exceptional potential and spread liberty and American democracy to the inhabitants from all over the world.

While mass muslim immigration has had been some negative consequences—such as an explosion of U.S. Female Genital Mutilation, an increase in homegrown terrorism, and the development of radicalized communities such as Dearborne, Michigan and Minneapolis, Minnesota– the benefits to big businesses and job creators will be enormous.

Rubio’s plan to expand the number of Muslim migrants admitted into the nation central to his vision for a “New American Economy”.

For instance, his H-1B bill currently before Congress—known as the I-Squared bill—would substantially increase Muslim immigration by lifting green card caps for foreign students and tripling the number of foreign workers admitted on visas. One of the bill’s biggest corporate backers, Disney—has already begun using these cost-effective foreign workers on H-1b visas to replace the more expensive American workers.

Rubio’s proposals to bring about this New American Economy have been endorsed by business groups and billionaires alike such as the Chamber of Commerce, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Sheldon Adelson, Disney’s Bob Iger and one of Rubio’s top donors, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison.

It is possible, however, that Rubio’s pledge to import more Muslim migrants might create some tension with his foreign policy goals.

Polls indicate that poor migrants from developing nations might not be overly receptive to Rubio’s goal of increasing military involvement in the Middle East.

As the 2016 race continues to unfold, it will be interesting to see how Rubio’s campaign is hawkish foreign policy is received in Dearborne, Michigan and Minneapolis, Minnesota.