Printer-friendly version
Federal judge from Maryland temporarily blocks the Trump administration from using ICE to arrest migrants in certain sensitive locations
By G. A. McNeeley
March 3, 2025 (Washington D.C.) - A federal judge on Monday, February 24, in Maryland, temporarily blocked Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from conducting raids, and targeting and arresting migrants inside of a select few churches, temples, and other places of worship run by organizations that filed the lawsuit. View the ruling.
The lawsuit challenged an order by the Trump administration to allow ICE enforcement in sensitive locations, including places of worship, a change to a longstanding federal policy which prohibited enforcement actions in places of worship as well as schools and hospitals. The religious groups challenged this change as unconstitutional. The ruling came down on the side of the religious groups who sued the Trump administration in response to the policy change, after asking federal courts to intervene.
President Donald Trump ran on a platform of tougher immigration enforcement, and has promised the largest deportation effort in history. But educators and religious leaders say those efforts have already gone too far, and are also violating the rights of American citizens.
Federal Judge Favors Religious Groups
U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang, in Maryland, ordered the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its subdivision, ICE, not to conduct immigration enforcement actions "in or near any place of worship" associated with the case brought by Quakers, Baptists, Sikhs, Mennonites, and Jewish congregations.
Unlike other nationwide restraining orders judges have issued against Trump administration policies in recent weeks, the order issued by Chuang only applies to the facilities used by a handful of the Quaker, Baptist and Sikh denominations and congregations that sued last month.
“Violations of this preliminary injunction shall subject defendants and all other persons bound by this order to all applicable penalties, including contempt of court,” Chuang wrote. This order doesn't apply to arrests authorized by an administrative or judicial warrant.
Chuang’s ruling is another setback for President Trump’s goal of strengthening immigration enforcement and conducting mass deportations of migrants who are in the country without legal authorization.
Chuang, who is based in Greenbelt, said the policy likely violated the groups’ First Amendment right to freedom of association, as well as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a federal law which restricts government activities that impinge on religious practice.
Chuang emphasized that his analysis was tailored to the houses of worship that filed suit because they explicitly welcome immigrants, regardless of legal status, and would logically be a target for potential Trump administration enforcement actions.
“In issuing this injunction, the Court does not question that law enforcement, when necessary, must have the ability to conduct operations in or near places of worship,” Chuang concluded. “The court finds only that at this early stage of the case, on the sensitive and fraught issue of when and under what circumstances law enforcement may intrude into places of worship to conduct warrantless operations, the 2025 policy’s lack of any meaningful limitations or safeguards … does not satisfy these constitutional and statutory requirements.”
The Changes That Are Being Made
For decades, federal immigration agents have generally avoided conducting enforcement sweeps or detentions at what the federal government deemed "sensitive" areas, although there were exceptions in emergencies.
The Biden administration in 2021 expanded the order, and schools, churches, hospitals and local courthouses were deemed generally off-limits in order to permit everyone (including those living illegally in the United States) access to worship, healthcare, education and the courts to resolve speeding tickets or other legal matters. Biden’s expansion also included bus stops, playgrounds, food pantries, weddings and funerals.
The acting head of DHS, Benjamine Huffman, had issued a memo that immediately removed that long standing policy, and instead told agents to use "common sense" in making arrests where necessary.
"Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest," Huffman said. "The Trump Administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement, and instead trusts them to use common sense."
Chuang, an appointee of President Barack Obama, said in a 59-page opinion that the removal of those limits threatened the religious freedom of the groups seeking relief from the court.
“The substantial burden that the Trump administration policy is far from speculative and is already occurring,” wrote Chuang, who noted reports that congregations with large immigrant populations have drawn fewer attendees since the Trump directive was issued last month. “It is reasonable to expect that such enforcement actions will occur at plaintiffs’ place of worship where DHS specifically stated in its press release announcing the 2025 policy that ‘criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest.’”
What Religious Groups Have To Say
Chuang's action means that about 1,700 places of worship associated with the plaintiffs' organizations in 35 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico will be temporarily spared from immigration enforcement operations.
The policy change was among the Trump administration's immigration actions criticized by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, although that organization did not join multiple lawsuits brought by faith communities.
The lawsuit argued that any government policy based solely on common sense was an unconstitutional violation of freedom of association under the First Amendment. The lawsuit also said the policy violated the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.
The Quakers said it violated their exercise of religion because having ICE agents park outside services and interrupting to “drag a congregant out during the middle of worship” would discourage attendance.
“For over 30 years, it has been the government’s official policy to not enforce immigration laws in ‘protected areas,’ which include houses of worship (and other religious ceremonies like weddings and funerals), absent certain extraordinary circumstances. Rightly so,” the lawsuit said. “Enforcement in protected areas like houses of worship would, in the government’s own words, ‘restrain people’s access to essential services or engagement in essential activities.’”
The groups that sued over the policy include Quaker congregations in Philadelphia; Richmond, Va.; Maryland and New England, as well as a Sikh temple in Sacramento, and a coalition of Cooperative Baptist Fellowship churches headquartered in Georgia.
What Other People Have To Say
Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, a group representing the plaintiffs, said in a statement, "For decades, the government has recognized that everyone, no matter their immigration status, should be able to attend houses of worship without fear of a warrantless government raid."
"Religious institutions should not have to go to court to fight for the right to worship and associate freely that is enshrined in our Constitution," Perryman said. "Our plaintiffs represent a unique and diverse coalition of religious groups that have been at the forefront in protecting values of religious liberty for centuries. We are grateful to the court for acting to limit this unlawful and harmful policy."
J. Kevin Appleby, senior fellow for policy at the Center for Migration Studies of New York and the former director of migration policy for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, told OSV News, the judge's decision "is certainly a good sign because the court agreed that immigration enforcement at places of worship can be a violation of religious liberty."
Appleby added that "while the judge did not issue a nationwide ban on enforcement at churches, he opened the door to that possibility in future cases.”
In a statement provided to OSV News about the policy change, Tricia McLaughlin, the Department of Homeland Security's assistant secretary for public affairs, said, "We are protecting our schools, places of worship, and Americans who attend by preventing criminal aliens and gang members from exploiting these locations and taking safe haven there because these criminals knew law enforcement couldn't go inside under the previous Administration."
"DHS's directive gives our law enforcement the ability to do their jobs," McLaughlin added.
Sources:
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/24/immigration-enforcement-places-of-worship-00205760
Comments
Hmmm...