In a significant legal ruling, a federal judge has upheld a controversial policy by the Trump administration that allows U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to conduct enforcement operations at churches and other places of worship. Despite multiple lawsuits from faith-based groups challenging the policy, Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump appointee, ruled in favor of ICE.
On Friday, the judge denied a request from more than two dozen Christian and Jewish organizations to block the policy. These faith-based groups had argued that the policy violates religious freedoms, creating an environment of fear that has reduced attendance at services, particularly among immigrants who fear detention by ICE.
Policy Change and Court’s Ruling
Judge Friedrich concluded that the evidence presented did not support the idea that ICE was specifically targeting religious institutions. She noted that only a few enforcement actions had taken place at or near religious sites. In her ruling, she stated that “the evidence suggests that congregants are staying home to avoid encountering ICE in their own neighborhoods, not because churches or synagogues are locations of elevated risk.”
The policy at the center of the lawsuit went into effect on January 20, the first day of Trump’s second term. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rescinded an Obama-era guideline that had discouraged ICE agents from making arrests in “sensitive locations” like schools, hospitals, and places of worship. Under the new rule, ICE officers no longer need special approval to carry out operations at these locations, as long as they use “common sense” and “discretion.”
Concerns from Religious Leaders
Religious leaders across various faiths had expressed their concerns, arguing that the new policy violated over three decades of precedent aimed at protecting immigrants and other vulnerable groups from being targeted in sacred spaces. They claimed that churches, synagogues, and mosques had long been considered places of sanctuary, where individuals should not fear government raids or arrests.
However, Judge Friedrich stated that it was unclear whether reviving the old policy would have an impact on attendance numbers. She suggested that broader immigration enforcement actions could still cause people to stay away from religious services, regardless of whether enforcement happens inside religious locations.
Ongoing Legal Challenges
The decision in this case is part of a broader legal battle over immigration enforcement in sensitive locations. Other federal courts are also weighing similar challenges to ICE operations.
In Maryland, a federal judge temporarily blocked ICE actions at religious sites for certain groups, including Quakers. Meanwhile, a judge in Colorado sided with the Trump administration in a case involving enforcement actions at schools.
For now, Judge Friedrich’s ruling means the Trump administration’s policy allowing ICE to operate at religious locations will remain in effect as the lawsuit moves forward.