Eman Abdelhadi, the half-sister of Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed, wrote in a 2016 essay that federal agents searched the home she shared with their mother, Fatten Elkomy. The disclosure, first reported by the Washington Free Beacon and highlighted by Daily Wire, has emerged during the final stretch of the campaign between El-Sayed and Republican Mike Rogers, who has pressed the Democrat on his family’s history with the Islamic American Relief Agency (IARA).

El-Sayed previously stated during a debate that attacks on his character stemmed from his mother’s work as a nurse in Missouri. However, court records indicate that Elkomy worked for the IARA, a Missouri-based charity, from 1999 through at least 2004. Federal agents raided the charity’s offices in October 2004, the same month the Treasury Department designated its global network as a terrorism supporter, citing financial support for Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda, and Hamas.

What the Right Is Saying

Republican nominee Mike Rogers has highlighted the discrepancy between El-Sayed’s description of his mother as a nurse and her documented employment at the IARA. Rogers has also pointed to social media posts from 2012 by Abdelhadi describing their mother’s activism in the Muslim Brotherhood as a college student in Egypt during the 1970s, arguing that voters deserve a full accounting of the family’s history.

Conservative commentators view the FBI raid on the family home as a significant revelation that contradicts El-Sayed’s narrative. They argue that the Treasury Department’s designation of the IARA’s network as a terrorism supporter and the subsequent guilty pleas by charity executives for illegally moving money to Iraq in violation of U.S. sanctions are relevant to the candidate’s character and judgment.

What the Left Is Saying

El-Sayed’s campaign has maintained that his mother’s work at the IARA involved helping orphaned children and that she was never charged in connection with the federal investigation. The campaign argues that the scrutiny is a distraction from policy issues and that El-Sayed has no personal ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization Rogers has linked to Elkomy’s earlier activism.

In a statement to NBC News, El-Sayed noted that his parents divorced when he was three years old and that he was raised by his father and stepmother. He stated that he had never discussed the subject of his mother’s past activism or employment with her. The campaign has not immediately responded to requests for further comment on the specific details of the home raid mentioned in Abdelhadi’s essay.

What the Numbers Show

Court records indicate that Fatten Elkomy worked for the Islamic American Relief Agency from 1999 through at least 2004. Exhibits in the government’s prosecution referenced her more than a dozen times, including her role in wire transfers and a request to send more than $24,000 to the charity’s Iraq office.

In 2016, the IARA admitted to funneling roughly $1.4 million to Iraq, a country subject to U.S. sanctions at the time. The charity’s executive director and a board member pleaded guilty to illegally moving money to Iraq. Elkomy was never charged in the case. The FBI raid on the family home occurred in the context of the broader investigation that began with the October 2004 raid on the charity’s offices.

The Bottom Line

The emergence of Abdelhadi’s written account places renewed focus on the background of El-Sayed’s mother and her employment history, which has become a central point of contention in the final days of the Senate race. Voters are weighing El-Sayed’s assertion that his mother was a nurse against court records documenting her role in a charity investigated for terrorism finance.

With the election approaching, the campaign is likely to continue to emphasize these contrasting narratives. Rogers’ team is expected to keep the issue in the headlines, while El-Sayed’s team focuses on distancing the candidate from his mother’s past professional and activist roles. The final outcome may hinge on whether Michigan voters view the historical details as disqualifying or as a matter of personal history that does not reflect the candidate’s current platform.