A recent trend has emerged in the Danish regulation of religion that is testing the limits of the ways in which the Constitution regulates Islam and Islamic faith communities, which politically may be found to be extreme, radicalising, or ‘against Danish values’. A majority political will in Parliament and governments have sought to limit the freedom of religion of these Islamic communities by exploring the ‘Limitation Clause’ in Article 67 of the Danish Constitution, which declares that ‘nothing at variance with good morals or public order shall be taught or done’, and reinterpreting the Non-Discrimination Clause in Article 70. This chapter presents, analyses and discusses this recent trend of limiting freedom of religion for all by framing and interpreting Islam and Muslims as being contrary to ‘public order and morality’ and ‘to Danish basic values and democratic principles’. This chapter does discuss the new Danish constitutional arguments in full detail but rather takes them as a starting point for discussing the human rights questions they raise about the justifiable limitations of freedom of religion by state institutions. This chapter gives examples from other ongoing European discussions on limitations of Muslim religious freedom. However, the focus is particularly on the human rights jurisprudence and recommendations of former UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Heiner Bielefeldt.