In a decisive triumph for those who stand firm on law and order, a federal judge has given a nod to President Trump’s immigration policy. This policy empowers U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to conduct enforcement operations at churches and other sacred grounds, much to the dismay of progressive religious factions hoping to shield illegal immigrants from facing the legal repercussions of their actions.
A coalition of left-leaning religious bodies had lodged a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), challenging the Trump administration’s initiative to reinstate pragmatic immigration enforcement measures in and around places of worship. The complaint filed is available here.
At the heart of this legal tussle lies the Trump administration’s directive, rolled out on the very first day of the new term, which ended the Obama-Biden-era policies that offered sanctuary to illegal immigrants in places of worship, educational institutions, and medical facilities.
With the new DHS memo, ICE and CBP agents have the discretion to act in accordance with the law — no matter the location.
U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich, appointed by Trump, dismissed the lawsuit brought by 27 left-leaning Christian and Jewish groups. These groups argued that the policy infringes upon religious liberties and has led to dwindling attendance. The full court ruling can be accessed here.
The court found there was scant evidence to suggest ICE is targeting religious institutions or that the policy change is solely to blame for declines in congregation numbers.
“The plaintiffs have not shown that enforcement actions are imminent at their places of worship,” Friedrich wrote, debunking the notion that ICE was targeting religious gatherings.
The court further noted that any dip in attendance might be due to broader enforcement strategies rather than this specific policy shift.
“The evidence implies that congregants are choosing to remain at home to avoid encounters with ICE in their own communities, not because their places of worship are hotbeds of risk,” Judge Friedrich explained.
The court observed that just one enforcement action had occurred at a plaintiff church since the policy’s enactment, alongside two additional incidences at unrelated church sites — all part of a nationwide initiative aimed at reinstating law and order after years of border chaos.
