Center for Security Policy media bias and reliability
Ad Fontes Media and Media Bias/Fact Check place Center for Security Policy on the far right. We have seen it on 1 published story of ours.
The short answers
Is Center for Security Policy biased?
Ad Fontes Media and Media Bias/Fact Check place Center for Security Policy on the far right. An outlet rating describes a broad pattern in its output, not every article it publishes.
Is Center for Security Policy left or right?
Ad Fontes Media and Media Bias/Fact Check place Center for Security Policy on the far right. In the three-way grouping used on story pages, that puts it under Right.
Is Center for Security Policy reliable?
The factual-reliability assessments we hold for Center for Security Policy are Media Bias/Fact Check: Mixed factuality. These are outlet-level assessments, not a guarantee that every report is correct.
What Center for Security Policy has been covering
Our account of each story, written from every outlet that ran it, with Center for Security Policy’s own report linked underneath.
Donald Trump stated he would support legislation prohibiting Sharia law in the United States, arguing the country must have only one legal system. He cited London and Paris as examples of European capitals where Islamic religious law operates as a 'second way of life'. Trump also discussed affordability, blaming Democrats for high prices.
Center for Security Policy reported it asPresident Trump takes a stand against Sharia (opens Center for Security Policy in a new tab)
Who says so
2 organisations have published a rating for this outlet, in their own words. Where they disagree, the disagreement is the useful part and it is left standing.
How reliably it reports fact
A rating of the newsroom in general, by others, and a different thing from the Trust score we publish on each story, which judges one piece of reporting.
Mixed factuality
- Media Bias/Fact CheckmixedCheck it
Who owns it
- Center for Security PolicyIndependentdirect owner
Where it publishes from
- Publishes from
- Washington, District of Columbia, United States
- Official site
- centerforsecuritypolicy.org
- Seen publishing on
- centerforsecuritypolicy.org
- Access
- Free to read
What we have seen ourselves
Counted across the stories this site has published, which is the only denominator a reader can check: every one of them has a page, and every page lists the reports it was written from.
- Stories
- 1
- Reports listed
- 1
- We could read
- 0
- First seen
- 28 August 2026
1 of those reports was paywalled or blocked to us. Our reading of this outlet is built on the 0 we could open, not on everything it published.
We have not seen Center for Security Policy cover a story that outlets rated right were largely absent from.
On the one story of ours where at least three of the reports we listed carried a time, another outlet was always ahead of Center for Security Policy: its report arrived a median of 29 hours after the earliest one we logged.
Measured 28 August 2026. Last seen in a coverage list 28 August 2026. Ratings pulled 28 August 2026.
Other outlets rated the same way
Publishers carrying the same published leaning as Center for Security Policy, also publishing from United States, ordered by how often we have seen them on a story. Sharing a rating is not the same as being alike.
Think this page is wrong?
The leanings above are published by AllSides, Ad Fontes Media and Media Bias/Fact Check, and we republish them rather than make them. If you think one is misapplied, the strongest place to say so is with the organisation that made it, and every verdict here links to their page.
What we are responsible for is everything else: the ownership chain, where Center for Security Policy publishes from, which of our stories we have listed it on, and whether we have the right publisher at all. Tell us what is wrong and an editor reads it.
Report something wrong on this page
Anything we correct is written up in the public corrections log. We do not publish reader votes as a rating, because an unattributed rating is the thing this site exists to argue against.
Every rating on this page is a named third party’s published work, republished with its author and, where one exists, a link to it. Our own coverage record is the section we measure ourselves. Neither is a judgement of any individual report: those are scored story by story, and the reasoning is on our methodology page.