Trump administration efforts to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education by slashing its workforce and closing offices is a “reckless move” that will create “chaos and confusion” and undermine religious freedom, said Amanda Tyler, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty.

“Public education and religious liberty go hand in hand. Public schools are the only education system where students’ rights to religious freedom are guaranteed to be fully protected,” Tyler said.

“Weakening federal oversight eliminates protections for religious freedom for all students, students with disabilities and low-income families. It is a blatant move to privatize education, redirecting public funds toward private sectarian schools at the expense of public institutions that serve all children.”

While the president lacks authority to dissolve a government department created by Congress without congressional approval, the Trump administration has implemented a major reduction in force affecting nearly half of its employees.

The Dallas regional Department of Education office that handles civil rights complaints is among seven being closed.

“This action is not about improving education—it is about asserting more authority than the president has,” Tyler said. “Gutting the Department of Education creates continued chaos and confusion, particularly for the most vulnerable students.

“This reckless move directly threatens religious liberty by eliminating staff engaged in essential oversight that ensures students can freely practice—or choose not to practice—religion without government coercion. Without these protections, public schools will be vulnerable to state-sponsored religious mandates and discrimination.

“Millions of students across the country will only be harmed, not helped, by firing seasoned civil servants who work tirelessly to ensure they are able to access a quality education. Systematically shutting down the department strips students of federal protections, denies them essential services, and leaves states and districts to fend for themselves.”

Some assert department pushes ‘political ideology’

Of course, not everyone agreed with Tyler. The conservative Eagle Forum applauded what it called an end to “the reign of the Department of Un-Education.”

“Since its opening in 1979, radical teachers unions, and leftist politicians have used this agency to push their political ideology into America’s classrooms and overstep states’ rights. Young minds have been poisoned, parents’ rights have been eroded and test scores have failed to improve. … President Donald Trump has been fulfilling his promises to make American education great again in recent weeks,” the Eagle Forum stated on its website.

Last November, evangelist Franklin Graham voiced support for Trump’s call to shut down the Department of Education.

“The Department of Education has only existed since 1979, and we were better off without it,” Graham posted on Facebook. “We have been spending billions of dollars for what?

“To dumb our children down? To teach them to disrespect the flag and our nation? To introduce them to sexual content at earlier ages including gay and transgender agendas? For them to be taught the lies of Critical Race Theory and DEI? … I think we can do better. Put the parents back in the driver’s seat and let schools come under state and local leadership.”

Part of a larger effort to destroy public education

Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, linked the Trump Administration’s efforts to dismantle the Department of Education to “the Christian nationalist agenda set out in Project 2025 to destroy public education that benefits all communities in favor of private, religious education.”

Public school districts and universities around the country—and the students they serve—depend on the Department of Education, Laser said.

“Among its many important functions, the Department of Education ensures that millions of American students receive financial aid for higher education and that public schools respect students’ civil rights,” Laser said.

“The stroke of a magic marker cannot take away those important functions and rights from American students.”

Laser alluded to a widely circulated draft of an executive order directing Secretary of Education Linda McMahon to facilitate the closing of the Department of Education “to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law.” To date, the president has not signed an executive order concerning the Department of Education.

Charles Foster Johnson, founding executive director of Pastors for Texas Children, emphasized the important work of the U.S. Department of Education.

“While public education is mainly a state authority and not a federal one, the Department of Education does put the weight of the U.S. Constitution behind the goal of ensuring that minority children of color and disability receive the same educational opportunity as the majority.”

Johnson linked the efforts to cut the Department of Education to efforts at the state and local level to undermine public education and redirect public funds to private schools.

“The same people behind dismantling the federal Department of Education are also pushing private school voucher programs in all the states. These political forces have opposed publicly funded universal education for decades,” Johnson said.

“The end goal of the voucher crowd is to end American public education, to destroy our children’s publicly provided education accorded to all children, and to put it on an open, privatized market—simply put, to make commodities of our kids and for-profit markets of our classrooms. It’s wrong and must be stopped.”

WASHINGTON (RNS)—In a March 10 status report on refugee resettlement, President Donald Trump’s administration acknowledged there had been a “significant deterioration of functions” due to its stop-work orders and suspension of resettlement programs.

The status report was produced to comply with a federal judge’s order after the administration was sued by three faith-based refugee resettlement organizations, along with refugees and their families, for suspending the federal refugee program.

The administration signaled it planned to move forward with identifying a single service provider for refugee resettlement in the status report, a drastic change in how refugees would receive services when they arrive in the United States.

It was “preparing a request for proposals for a new resettlement agency” and expected a solicitation process to take three months, according to the status report.

“This proposal would punish those who have long supported refugee families and abandon decades of expertise and infrastructure that make this program successful,” said Rick Santos, president and CEO of Church World Service, one of two refugee resettlement agencies the administration has resumed working with.

“Doing so is harmful, unnecessary and acts to strip newly arriving refugee families from accessing a robust support network to rebuild their lives.”

The administration also said it did not know how long it would take to restart refugee processing from overseas, as Church World Service and the United Nations’ International Organization for Migration, the other organization the administration resumed working with, will need to rehire furloughed workers.

U.S. District Judge Jamal Whitehead ordered the Trump administration to produce the status report on refugee resettlement at an emergency hearing March 4.

Plaintiffs in Pacito v. Trump—which include faith-based organizations Church World Service, HIAS, Lutheran Community Services Northwest and individual refugees and their families—argued the administration was not complying with Whitehead’s Feb. 25 ruling that blocked the president’s Jan. 20 executive order suspending the refugee program.

In the February ruling, Whitehead had said the president’s actions amounted to a “nullification of congressional will.”

The day after the Feb. 25 ruling, the Trump administration sent out termination notices to the 10 refugee resettlement organizations in the United States, seven of which are faith based. Lawyers for the three faith groups and the nine individual plaintiffs suing the government had requested the March 4 emergency hearing because they believed the terminations were an attempt to undermine Whitehead’s order.

At the end of the hearing, Whitehead said, “The timing of the government’s decision to terminate the contracts of the resettlement agencies just one day after the court issued its preliminary injunction raises serious concerns about whether these actions are designed to circumvent the court’s ruling.”

Exploring ‘alternatives to the traditional reception and placement program’

In the status report, the Trump administration’s lawyers argued the State Department is not required by law to provide reception and placement benefits to refugees when they arrive in the United States.

Melissa Keaney, a senior supervising attorney at the International Refugee Assistance Project, pushed back on that claim in an email to RNS, saying, “The court already found that provision of these critical services is required by Congress.”

She cited the nearly 50-year history of refugee resettlement agencies providing “critical domestic services and benefits to recently arrived refugees.”

The Trump administration indicated the State Department “is also exploring alternatives to the traditional reception and placement program” without providing further details to protect “deliberative process privileges.”

In an interview with RNS, Rachel Levitan, chief global policy and advocacy officer at HIAS—a Jewish organization that provides humanitarian aid and assistance to refugees—echoed Santos’ concerns about the impact the administration’s pivot to a single service provider would have on resettlement expertise and experience.

She said the government’s three-month solicitation process was “ really slow-walking its obligations to comply with the preliminary injunction.”

Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge, of which Lutheran Community Services Northwest is an affiliate, struck a more hopeful tone regarding the government’s status report.

“We are encouraged by the government’s efforts to resume refugee resettlement operations, and we hope this will minimize what has been a prolonged disruption to families seeking safety and stability in the United States,” she wrote.

However, she added, “While we understand that operational disruptions are inevitable, the delay in processing and support services has caused real harm to refugees who are already in vulnerable situations. We urge the government to ensure that the United States continues to honor its legal and moral commitments to protecting refugees.”

Responding to Whitehead’s order, the Trump administration’s report also addressed its delay in financially reimbursing faith organizations for contracted work, including work undertaken during the Biden administration.

The report said on March 10, the Office of Refugee Resettlement had directed all payments for work done during the Biden administration to be released. It also said, “The Department of State is reviewing pending payment requests from plaintiff organizations for expenses already incurred and will pay legitimate requests in due course.”

The Trump administration highlighted two payments made Feb. 26 and March 6 to HIAS, accounting for slightly more than $5 million. Levitan told RNS she anticipates HIAS will submit further requests for reimbursement to be fully compensated for its expenses.

Vignarajah also said Global Refuge appreciates the “acknowledgment of pending payment requests” and it remains hopeful “the government will expedite the reimbursement process for expenses already incurred.”

“Many of our partners rely on timely funding to continue their essential work with refugees, and it’s crucial that these payments are processed given the months-long delay,” she said.

Administration ‘formulating new vetting guidelines’

The status report also said the Trump administration had processed hundreds of refugee applications and petitions in the first week of March but that it would be “formulating new vetting guidelines for refugees” with “heightened standards.”

Levitan said, “The lack of transparency about (the new vetting guidelines) and the potential of not resettling people who have been fully vetted and/or have very strong persecution claims are very concerning to us.”

Keaney, of the International Refugee Assistance Project, said the status report raises more questions than answers.

“Rather than showing progress, it confirms what was apparent when the government issued termination notices to resettlement agencies just 24 hours after the preliminary injunction went into effect: this administration’s flagrant intent to undermine and circumvent the judiciary and Congress,” she said.

Moreover, the International Refugee Assistance Project’s statement noted: “In the two weeks since the preliminary injunction order, none of the individual plaintiffs in the case have received any communication from the government about rebooking their travel or other steps to move their cases forward.”

In the report, the Trump administration said it sought the individual plaintiffs’ identities “to confirm the status of their individual applications” but its lawyers still were reviewing a proposed protective order from the refugees’ lawyers.

HIAS president Mark Hetfield said: “With every day that the government stalls in implementing the court order, refugees around the world who were already approved for resettlement suffer greater and greater anxiety. Their approvals expire over time. We are ready to welcome people through the safe and legal resettlement process. We just need the U.S. government to do the same.”

WASHINGTON (RNS)—Evangelical Christian groups are calling on Congress to reinstate foreign aid programs shuttered by President Donald Trump’s administration, arguing the government’s actions will hurt millions of people around the world.

About three dozen evangelical Christians assembled at Capitol Hill Presbyterian Church on March 11 for a “Prayer Vigil for Foreign Aid.” Eugene Cho, president and CEO of Bread for the World, denounced the “broad, untargeted cuts” recently implemented at the U.S. Agency for International Development as an assault on vulnerable populations all over the globe.

“These indiscriminate cuts are not just a policy failure,” said Cho, standing in a sanctuary dotted with candles. “For us, especially, as followers of Christ, as uncomfortable as it may be, we must clearly … but prophetically, say: it is also a moral failure.”

The unusual vigil, featuring an array of evangelical organizations such as World Relief and the Accord Network publicly criticizing the federal government, came a day after Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared on social media that the government will cancel 83 percent of programs at USAID.

The announcement followed weeks of chaos at the agency involving work stoppages, ongoing legal battles and mass layoffs led by billionaire Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency.

In a March 10 email, Matthew Soerens, vice president of advocacy and policy at World Relief, the humanitarian arm of the National Association of Evangelicals, told Religion News Service the group’s contracts were among those canceled.

Although he celebrated the fact that four of World Relief’s grants in Sudan, South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo unexpectedly were reinstated, he noted two of those grants are “scheduled to be completed this month,” and the organization has not received “any information on proposals for renewal.”

Meanwhile, he said, the group’s work in Haiti remains in limbo, with World Relief having received a “stop work” order in January but no formal cancellation. Furthermore, World Relief still hasn’t received any reimbursements for work already done.

“It’s very difficult to operate until we’re confident we will be reimbursed,” Soerens wrote.

In addition, a representative for Catholic Relief Services, the single largest recipient of USAID funds in recent years, according to Forbes, confirmed to RNS their contracts were also among those canceled, although they were unable to clarify precisely how many.

Speakers stress human impact of cuts

During Tuesday’s vigil, several speakers highlighted the human toll of the cuts. Kombo Choga, senior director for program design at Compassion International, pointed out his organization currently does not receive government funds, but said they “are witnessing how the withdraw of aid is devastating” populations they work with, including children.

“It’s causing harm now, and into the future,” he told the crowd, which included evangelical Christian USAID staffers who were laid off during recent cuts. Several held signs emblazoned with slogans such as “Hunger won’t wait” and “Aid strengthens American national security.”

Choga argued while the government has a responsibility to assess the proper use of taxpayer funds, the Bible offers “very clear guidance.”

“Whoever is kind to the poor lends to the Lord,” he said, citing Proverbs 19:17.

Carol Bremer-Bennett, executive director of World Renew, expressed a similar sentiment during her prayer at the event.

“We lament the choices of those in power who have turned away from the suffering of your children,” she said

Funding “has been withdrawn from clinics where babies take their first breaths, from hospitals where mothers fight to survive childbirth, from communities where clean water and medicine once flowed,” she added.

The cuts, Bremer-Bennett said, are “not just numbers on a page,” but “real lives lost.”

‘It’s not too late’

Cho and others expressed frustration at the administration’s actions but also highlighted the potential role of Congress, arguing lawmakers have the power to reinstate the programs.

“We are here today to urge the administration and Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike, to do all that they can,” Cho said. “It’s not too late to protect critical international aid that supports tens of millions of people suffering alone right now.”

In a separate interview, Cho said he was aware of “conversations that are happening behind the scenes” in the halls of Congress regarding aid, but that he and others feel compelled by their faith to publicly voice their concerns with the Trump administration and lawmakers.

“We pray for the administration, but we also are urging our elected members of Congress to do their responsibility—and to do their duty—to follow through on the allocation of those resources,” he said.

Cho was echoed by Lanre Williams-Ayedun, a senior vice president of international programs at World Relief. Speaking at the vigil, she insisted when leaders “neglect the vulnerable,” including those who benefit from foreign aid, it amounts to “turning away from God.”

In addition, James Standish of ADRA, the global humanitarian arm of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, was one of many speakers who noted that foreign aid makes up less than 1 percent of the federal budget.

“We sing that song: ‘God bless America.’ Well, folks, God has blessed America,” Standish said, arguing the Bible instructs believers to share their blessings with others.

‘Grievance’ driving decisions

Multiple speakers made clear that while they believed the foreign aid system has issues, drastically reducing programs was not the answer. Randy Tift, senior adviser at the Accord Network, raised concerns that a cycle of grievance was driving many of the Trump administration’s actions.

“People involved in these recent decisions on all sides, some in current leadership, were grievously mistreated in the past,” Tift said. “I fear grievance is driving a lot of the new team’s decisions; dedicated and faithful USAID staff, including former staff—some of whom are here today—have now been treated with cruelty by some who were aggrieved in the past.”

Other speakers included Gillian Foster Wilkinson, director of strategic alliances at Hope International, and Jessica Moerman, president and CEO of the Evangelical Environmental Network.

After the vigil, Cho told RNS the event originally was planned to be held in front of Congress but had to be moved for scheduling reasons. The hope, he said, was to dispute the idea that Christians, “including those that come from more conservative or evangelical leanings,” are in support of USAID’s cuts.

Cho acknowledged it may take time to turn hearts in Congress but said his group was prepared for a long fight.

“We’re not interested in putting on one-time events,” he said.

OKLAHOMA (RNS)—Ryan Walters is looking for 55,000 Bibles, and he is seeking $60 donations for each of them.

Walters, who is Oklahoma’s state superintendent of public instruction, has made national headlines for his efforts to get Bibles into the hands of public school students in his state.

After state officials earlier this week rejected his request for $3 million to buy the Bibles, Walters launched a fundraising campaign to buy copies endorsed by President Donald Trump, with the help of country singer Lee Greenwood.

“We faced opposition from left-wing activists in the state, left-wing legal groups, and frankly, we’ve had some Republicans that haven’t wanted to step up for the initiative,” Walters said in a phone interview, adding he is grateful to Greenwood for stepping up and lending a hand.

Walters and Greenwood teamed up to launch a “Bibles for Oklahoma” campaign to purchase copies of Greenwood’s God Bless the USA Bible, which will then be donated to schools. The God Bless the USA Bible includes within it the King James Version, along with patriotic documents like the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.

“The goal of this campaign is to provide copies of the God Bless the USA Bible to as many schools within the State of Oklahoma Department of Education as possible,” according to the campaign’s website.

Each copy of the patriotic Bible costs $60, the same retail price Greenwood’s website lists.

Last year, the Oklahoma Department of Education paid $25,000 for 500 copies of the Christian Scriptures—or $50 each, according to the Oklahoma Voice. Those 500 Bibles were bought for use in Advanced Placement government classes.

Online Bible retailers offer less expensive Bibles that include just the religious text. Christianbook.com, for example, sells a case of 24 King James Versions with imitation leather covers for $155.76, or $6.49 each. Churchsource.com, run by the Christian publisher Thomas Nelson, offers a 58 percent discount when purchasing more than 25 cases of Bibles.

A spokesman for the God Bless the USA Bible said a bulk discount wasn’t available for the donation programs, since donors will buy one Bible at a time. If all 55,000 Bibles Walters hopes to buy were ordered at the same time, that would be different, the spokesperson said.

Bible and American documents bound together

Walters said his push to get the Bibles into the classroom came in response to requests from parents and grandparents who were upset that their kids didn’t understand the role the Bible played in American history. 

“I think it’s so important that our kids understand what made America great,” he said. “What were those key documents and key beliefs that individuals held throughout our history that made America the greatest country in the history of the world?”

Walters also said he believes it is important to have the Bible and documents like the Constitution and Declaration of Independence in the same resource so kids can look at them side by side.

The state requires students to understand both the Bible and patriotic documents, so having them within the same resource makes it easier for students to learn about them, he asserted.

Oklahoma officials have been less than enthusiastic about Walters’ plans for the Bible. In explaining why the funding request was rejected, Democratic Oklahoma state Sen. Mary Boren told an Oklahoma City television station legislators wanted to avoid “legal complications” while working on the budget, as well as focusing on reading and math in school.

“You can tell that was a big priority,” she told KOCO, an ABC station.

Governor prefers Bible smartphone app

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt said in a press conference he believes in the importance of religious liberty but does not support the idea of spending $3 million of tax dollars on Bibles.

Stitt, who has supported a state-funded Christian charter school, also said there are easier ways to get the Bible to school kids. He pointed to the YouVersion Bible app, which is run by an Oklahoma megachurch and has been downloaded hundreds of millions of times.

“I’m sure most kids have the Bible app on their phones,” he said.

Walters rejected the governor’s criticism of his efforts.

“Unfortunately, our governor has been coming out against a bunch of President Trump’s initiatives,” Walters said.

University of Oklahoma sociology professor Sam Perry said teaching about the Bible in schools can be appropriate—especially for understanding the culture, history and laws of the United States.

“To understand American history and culture, I think it is necessary to have some measure of religious literacy,” said Perry, who studies Christian nationalism, or the idea that America was founded by and belongs to Christians.

Perry said the God Bless the USA Bible isn’t the only version to include patriotic documents, and including such documents influences how people read the Bible and can have political overtones.

“We have this narrative of America being founded on Judeo-Christian biblical principles,” he said. “And if you want to emphasize that, you stick those documents in your Bible.”

Walters defended the pricing of the God Bless the USA Bible, saying it has a high-quality binding and will stand up to daily use in the classroom.

He also dismissed the idea of purchasing separate Bibles and copies of patriotic documents, saying the point was to get all the resources in the same place.

While phone apps can be helpful, he said, textbooks still matter. Walters also said he has been criticized for trying to push religion on students, which he rejects. Instead, Walters said, he’s trying to get schools back to teaching the basics.

“What we’re doing is making sure kids understand the role that it played in America and American society,” he said.

“Until the 1960s, this wouldn’t have even been controversial. There was a Bible in every classroom. We’ve got to get back to that, so kids understand the historical relevance there.”

WASHINGTON (RNS)—President Donald Trump’s administration is making moves to shutter a decades-old partnership between the government and a group of mostly religious organizations to resettle refugees, with the State Department abruptly canceling grant agreements with all the agencies despite ongoing legal battles.

On Feb. 26, refugee resettlement organizations, such as Church World Service, HIAS and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, say they received “termination notification” letters from the State Department.

“This award is being terminated for the convenience of the U.S. Government pursuant to a directive from U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, for alignment with Agency priorities and national interest,” read one of the letters, addressed to Church World Service, according to a legal filing from Thursday.

“The decision to terminate this individual award is a policy determination vested in the Secretary of State.”

Refugee agency leaders condemn termination

Leaders of the faith-based refugee resettlement organizations, which constitute seven of the 10 groups that partner with the government to perform the task, condemned the decision.

“Our status as a resettlement agency based on this termination notice is over,” said Danilo Zak, director of policy for Church World Service.

CWS is “still trying to figure out the legality” of the action and whether the administration intended to bring the partnership to such an abrupt end, he added, but said, “I think we have to assume it did.”

He also noted the termination did not include a thorough review, which is the typical protocol for canceling a grant.

“We understand this is the result of an exceedingly cursory review of these programs,” Zak said.

Ending long partnership ‘with the stroke of a pen’

He was echoed by Myal Greene, the president of World Relief, an evangelical Christian group.

“With the cancellation of World Relief and other Resettlement Agency agreements, this is effectively ending a 45 year, bipartisan, refugee resettlement program with the stroke of a pen,” Greene said.

“As followers of Jesus, we are called to serve ‘the least of these,’ and cutting off life-saving assistance to vulnerable communities is an abdication of that responsibility,” Greene continued.

“The church has long played a role in alleviating suffering, but we cannot do it alone. Our government must uphold its commitment to protecting human dignity and aiding those in greatest need.”

Timothy Young, spokesperson for Global Refuge, a Lutheran organization that assists with refugee resettlement, told RNS all 10 resettlement orgs received the notices.

“Prior to this, we had received a stop work order from State and were hopeful it might be lifted after the administration’s 90-day review—but before that review could even be completed, our grants were terminated,” Young said in an email.

USCCB spokesperson Chieko Noguchi confirmed to RNS that they also “received notice from the State Department that they are terminating two of the cooperative agreements that fund much of the work we do in our Migration and Refugee Services department.”

The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Two lawsuits filed

The letters come as the government is involved in two separate lawsuits over the president’s decision to freeze the refugee program via an executive order signed his first day in office.

On Feb. 26, Church World Service, HIAS and Lutheran Community Services Northwest won a victory over the Trump administration in their lawsuit, Pacito v. Trump, with a federal judge blocking the president’s order and calling Trump’s actions a “nullification of congressional will.”

According to The Associated Press, the judge argued from the bench that the president does not have “limitless” authority over refugee admissions, noting the law establishing the program was passed by Congress.

Even so, the Trump administration appears to be using the termination notices to their legal advantage.

On Feb. 27, the federal government filed a motion in a separate case brought by the USCCB that cited the termination notices, saying the cancellation of grant agreements “leaves open only a question of unpaid money under the cooperative agreements, and, to the extent Plaintiff disputes any reimbursement, the dispute needs to be brought in the Court of Federal Claims.”

Still seeking preliminary injunction relief

Refugee agencies are not backing down, however. In a Thursday filing, lawyers for the religious groups in Pacito v. Trump referred to the termination notices as “the latest iteration of the Defendants’ unlawful attempt to dismantle the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.”

The USCCB took a similar tack in its own case.

“The government’s termination only confirms the need for preliminary injunctive relief,” read a Thursday filing from USCCB’s lawyers.

In a statement to RNS, USCCB spokesperson Chieko Noguchi said during a hearing, the judge in the case requested additional briefing in response to the State Department letters.

“We are preparing the requested briefing, which will be filed with the court next week,” Noguchi said.

Since Trump froze the refugee program shortly after taking office, faith-based refugee organizations have reported widespread layoffs and furloughs of staff, hoping to use what funds they have left to serve recently arrived refugees who are still under their care.

Refugee groups attribute the swift nature of the layoffs to the sudden freezing of funds for their work—including, according to some agencies, a refusal by the Trump administration to reimburse the groups for work done before the president took office.

Some staging protests

In addition to filing lawsuits, some of the refugee groups have staged protests, including one convened outside the White House earlier in February featuring clergy and lawmakers such as Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland.

Meanwhile, refugees have been unable to enter the country, and while the Trump administration has expressed support for accepting Afrikaner South Africans as refugees—a characterization rejected by many in South Africa itself, including by white South African Christian leaders—agencies say they are not sure how members of the group could come to the United States.

Episcopal Migration Ministries, another faith-based refugee resettlement agency, has already cut 22 positions since January and will likely cut more. A spokesperson for the Episcopal Church said 97 percent of the ministry’s funding comes from U.S. government grants.

“We understand that work to be discontinued because there’s no new arrivals and no funding,” said Amanda Skofstad, the spokesperson.

Still, the agency’s work will continue for now.

“Our commitment to ministering with and to migrants and refugees is not changed by this,” Skofstad said. “Exactly how we carry that out is a little uncertain for the immediate future. We’re going to have to figure it out.”

A federal judge in Seattle issued a preliminary injunction blocking President Donald Trump’s executive order to suspend refugee admissions, saying the president likely exceeded his authority.

Three faith-based refugee service agencies—Church World Service, Lutheran Community Services Northwest and HIAS—and nine individual refugees sued the Trump administration after the government froze funding for refugee admissions.

U.S. District Court Judge Jamal Whitehead said on Feb. 25 the president’s executive order probably “crossed the line” of separation of powers by nullifying a law Congress passed, the Washington State Standard reported.

“To be sure, the president has substantial discretion … to suspend refugee admissions. But that authority is not limitless,” Whitehead said.

The judge, who issued his ruling from the bench, indicated he will issue a full rationale in a written opinion within a few days.

‘Interests of the United States’

August Flentje, a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice, told the judge the government probably will appeal. He asserted the executive order was well within the president’s authority to deny entry to foreigners whose admission to the United States would “be detrimental to the interests” of the nation.

Trump issued the executive order, “Realigning the United States Refugee Admissions Program,” on Jan. 20, asserting the nation had been “inundated” with migrants and refugees.

“The United States lacks the ability to absorb large numbers of migrants, and in particular, refugees, into its communities in a manner that does not compromise the availability of resources for Americans, that protects their safety and security, and that ensures the appropriate assimilation of refugees,” the order stated.

The order suspended Refugee Admissions Program “until such time as the further entry into the United States of refugees aligns with the interests of the United States.”

Door ‘suddenly slammed shut’

In their motion requesting a preliminary injunction, the plaintiffs asserted the executive order freezing funds for refugee resettlement has caused “irreparable and, indeed, immeasurable harm” to vulnerable refugees and the agencies that serve them.

Refugees have “seen the doors to this country suddenly slammed shut, dashing their hopes of ever reaching safety and reuniting with family members,” the motion asserted.

The motion also noted Church World Service and HIAS had to furlough “hundreds of staff worldwide and must decide whether they can outlast this assault on resettlement long enough to again welcome refugees when, if ever, the program resumes.”

Rick Santos, president and CEO of Church World Service, said his agency felt “validated” by the preliminary injunction, but parties involved “know there are miles to go before refugees, separated families and our communities can be reassured that the United States remains a nation of welcome.”

“Many of those impacted by President Trump’s actions are refugees who have already arrived in our communities. Upon arriving in the United States, they are legally entitled to employment services and social support so that they can get on their feet and become self-sufficient,” Santos stated.

“The United States has long been a beacon of hope to people fleeing violence and persecution. For the displaced, we still remain, as President Reagan said decades ago, ‘the shining city on the hill.’ The refugee neighbors we have welcomed into our neighborhoods, congregations and lives have made our communities more vibrant, prosperous and strong.

“Leaving behind refugee families our nation pledged to support is an abdication of our values, a failure of our moral leadership, and an abandonment of the faith communities we represent.”

‘A blessing … not a burden’

David Duea, CEO of Lutheran Community Service Northwest, said his agency and others filed their lawsuit to “stand for justice and accountability.”

 “The executive orders and stop-work orders aren’t just a breach of contract—they are a betrayal of trust for thousands of refugees,” Duea said. “Today was the first step to restore that trust.”

Mark Hetfeld, president of HIAS, said his agency was encouraged by the injunction and “hopeful that it will lead to a restoration of our ability to continue to welcome refugees, including religious minorities from Iran, Afghans who supported the U.S. mission and are now endangered, and families and individuals from all over the world who have fled violence and persecution.”

“America is at its best when it welcomes refugees,” Hetfeld said. “They are a blessing to our country, not a burden.”

A federal judge in Maryland granted a preliminary injunction to bar immigration agents from conducting warrantless raids on Cooperative Baptist Fellowship churches, as well as Quaker assemblies and a Sikh temple.

U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang issued the Feb. 24 ruling in the first of two cases religious groups filed to prevent immigration raids in houses of worship after the Trump administration lifted restrictions on enforcement in sensitive locations.

A coalition of groups affiliated with the Society of Friends—Quakers—initially filed the suit in Maryland on Jan. 27, which the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship and a Sikh temple in Sacramento, Calif., soon joined.

Later, a broad coalition of more than two dozen religious groups—including Convención Hispana Bautista de Texas and Fellowship Southwest—brought a separate suit. The Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law School filed that suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Likely to suffer irreparable harm

In granting the preliminary injunction, Chuang was acknowledging the plaintiffs were “likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief” and that the parties involved were “likely to succeed on the merits” of the case.

The judge noted as evidence of “irreparable harm” testimony presented by Paul Baxley, executive coordinator of CBF, who said some congregations have reported fewer people attending worship services and participating in programs such as English-as-a-Second-Language classes.

“Notably, one CBF congregation has reported a 66 percent decrease in attendance at its ESL program, while another has reported fewer participants in its low-income ministry activities, including its food pantry and clothing shelter,” the ruling stated.

Plaintiffs in the case asserted they are likely to succeed based on the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

While granting the preliminary injunction, the judge limited it to the named plaintiffs in his court. So, it does not directly affect the religious groups involved in the other suit in the District of Columbia.

Baxley called the ruling “a powerful validation of the values that have defined the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship—a steadfast commitment to religious liberty, local church autonomy, and the clear separation of church and state.”

“For decades, our congregations have faithfully engaged in ministry among immigrants and refugees, offering a bold and courageous witness to the remarkable and relentless love of Christ,” Baxley stated.

“This decision reinforces our effort to restore the sensitive location protections that have allowed our congregations to worship and minister freely. While our work continues, we celebrate this victory as a testament to the bold faith that rises from freedom rather than coercion.”

(RNS)—Americans are polarized on many issues in public life, from what books kids should be allowed to read in school to how to reform the nation’s immigration system.

One thing most do agree on, regardless of party affiliation, is in-vitro fertilization—more commonly known as IVF. Seventy percent of Americans told Pew Research they believe access to IVF is a good thing, while only 8 percent said it was bad, according to a 2024 survey.

Members of the nation’s largest faith groups also see IVF access as a positive, including Black Protestants (69 percent), Catholics (65 percent) and the evangelical (63 percent) and non-evangelical (78 percent) varieties of white Protestants, as do the unaffiliated (78 percent).

That’s likely one reason why Donald Trump recently issued an executive order on Feb. 18, promising to reduce the cost of IVF.

“Therefore, to support American families, it is the policy of my Administration to ensure reliable access to IVF treatment, including by easing unnecessary statutory or regulatory burdens to make IVF treatment drastically more affordable,” Trump wrote.

While people in the pews might applaud the president’s actions, a number of high-profile faith leaders, including the nation’s Catholic bishops, are not pleased.

Some oppose the action

“As pastors, we see the suffering of so many couples experiencing infertility and know their deep desire to have children is both good and admirable; yet the Administration’s push for IVF, which ends countless human lives and treats persons like property, cannot be the answer,” wrote Bishops Daniel E. Thomas, chair of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, and Bishop Robert E. Barron, chair of the Committee for Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth, in a statement released by the USCCB on Thursday.

The Catholic bishops—like other faith groups that oppose abortion on the belief that life starts at conception—says IVF is well-intentioned but immoral. While millions of children have been born following IVF, the process often involves freezing or discarding excess embryos.

“The IVF industry treats human beings like products and freezes or kills millions of children who are not selected for transfer to a womb or do not survive,” the bishops wrote.

“Tuesday’s executive order promoting IVF is thus fatally flawed and stands in regrettable contrast to the promising pro-life actions of the Administration last month.”

IVF and the treatment of excess embryos had been a matter of heated debate in the early 2000s, when those embryos were seen as potential subjects for stem cell research.

But any public controversy about IVF had largely faded until the spring of 2024, when the Alabama Supreme Court ruled during a wrongful death lawsuit that embryos could be considered children. That led clinics in Alabama to shut down until the state’s legislature passed a new law to protect IVF treatments.

Last summer, Southern Baptists passed a resolution asking church members to be wary of IVF and calling the process immoral. The resolution also called for more government regulation of IVF and for limits on how many embryos are created in treatment.

Brent Leatherwood, president of the SBC’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, says the White House should heed the denomination’s advice when thinking about rules for IVF.

“The statement is clear and convictional as it honors life and adoption; affirms the dignity of the preborn; laments infertility; opposes the destruction of life; and requests the government to restrict actions inconsistent with human dignity,” he said in an email Thursday.

“With this resolution, I believe our churches have expressed a wise framework for how we can think about this issue. It’s one our government should use as well—which the ERLC has highlighted in numerous policy briefings in Washington.”

While Trump has been praised by abortion foes for the end of Roe v. Wade, over the past year, the president’s views on IVF and his distancing from outright abortion bans have led to controversy—especially after the 2024 GOP platform no longer called for an end to abortion.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, urged Trump to put in new rules to restrict IVF rather than expanding access.

In a response to Trump’s executive order, Perkins released a statement criticizing IVF for causing the death of embryos and saying the treatment does not address the medical conditions that cause infertility.

“The Trump administration can address the infertility crisis in America in a way that is morally and scientifically sound, enabling many more Americans to experience the beautiful gift of children,” he wrote.

Lila Rose, president of the anti-abortion group Live Action, stated her opposition to increasing IVF access more bluntly.

“No one is entitled to a child at the cost of denying the humanity and rights of countless others,” she said in a statement.

“A compassionate society must work to support families while upholding the dignity and protection of every human being—born and preborn. President Trump and our other leaders should champion ethical, life-affirming fertility options that protect both mothers and children.”

Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco, who has been outspoken in his criticism of IVF, has said IVF is harmful to children, calling it “yet another example of adults putting their desires before the best interests of children.”

“Moreover, IVF is not ‘fertility treatment,’” he said.

“It does nothing to address the heartbreak of infertility. There are effective medical treatments for couples struggling in this area. If the government is going to expend resources to make the manufacturing of babies in a laboratory more easily accessible, it should do the same for medical treatment of infertility.”

By contrast, Americans for IVF, which calls itself a “conservative pro-family group” cheered Trump’s order, saying it would help infertile couples have children—without the financial burden of paying for IVF treatments, which can cost tens of thousands of dollars per attempt.

“As a pro-life rabbi and father of nine children, I can confidently tell religious conservatives that there is nothing more pro-life than IVF,” said Rabbi Moshe Margaretten, the group’s founder.

(Aleja Hertzler-McCain contributed to this story.)

WASHINGTON (RNS)—Lawmakers and religious groups are speaking out in support of a bill that would largely protect immigrants from Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids within 1,000 feet of “sensitive locations” such as hospitals, schools and churches.

Rep. Jesús G. Garcia, D-Ill., reintroduced the Protecting Sensitive Locations Act on Feb. 8, along with 13 Democratic co-sponsors, including Reps. Pramila Jayapal of Washington, Janice Schakowsky of Illinois and Jasmine Crockett of Texas.

The bill would bar immigration enforcement actions at or near churches and an array of other locations—such as organizations that assist children or pregnant women, rape crisis centers, sites of funerals, weddings or other “public religious ceremonies,” Social Security offices and polling places—except “under exigent circumstances.”

“No one—no child in the classroom, no mother in a hospital, no family at a place of worship—should live in fear that an immigration raid should shatter their lives in the very spaces meant to protect them,” Garcia said Feb. 13, when he discussed the bill on the House floor.

Garcia went on to note in addition to immigrants skipping appointments out of fear of being detained by ICE officers, “churches are turning to virtual worship services so that they will not put their parish at risk.”

“We cannot become a government that normalizes cruelty,” Garcia said.

‘A threat to public safety’

A companion bill also was introduced in the U.S. Senate by Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and 23 Democratic and Independent co-sponsors, including Sens. Raphael Warnock of Georgia, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

“Allowing ICE to invade spaces where people access health care, education, justice and prayer is cruel and unnecessary, as well as a threat to public safety,” Blumenthal said.

 “When people are too frightened to seek medical care or report a crime, the entire community suffers. The Protecting Sensitive Locations Act establishes fundamental safeguards for our immigrant neighbors who have lived here for decades, worked hard, raised families and enriched our communities.”

Among the 580 organizations endorsing the bills are several religious groups, such as the Union for Reform Judaism, United Methodist Church General Board of Church and Society, United Church of Christ, Sikh Coalition, Unitarian Universalist Association, the Catholic social justice lobby network and the justice team of the Sisters of Mercy of the Americas.

The Catholic Health Association also endorsed the Protecting Sensitive Locations Act in a letter addressed to lawmakers earlier this month.

“We affirm that every human life is sacred and possesses inalienable worth, and that health care is essential to promoting and protecting the inherent dignity of every individual,” read the letter from Sr. Mary Haddad, president and CEO of CHA. “When access to health care is impeded, our mission to provide care is also.”

In addition, a spokesperson for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops told Religion News Service the “issue of sensitive locations is of great concern” and noted their group endorsed an earlier version of the legislation in 2017 but said the Catholic organization currently is “analyzing the updated text” of the latest iteration of the bill.

Lawsuits filed by religious groups

Legislation designed to protect sensitive locations has been introduced multiple times in the past as part of an effort to preempt any attempt to rescind a 2011 memo that discouraged immigration agents from conducting raids at schools, hospitals and churches.

But its latest reintroduction comes after the Trump administration finally did away with the memo, spurring faith leaders from a number of groups, including Catholic Charities USA and National Latino Evangelical Coalition, to issue condemnations.

Outrage only increased when ICE agents reportedly attempted to enter an Atlanta church in January to arrest an immigrant before ultimately arresting him after he stepped outside.

The next day, a cadre of Quaker groups—and, later, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship and Sikh Temple Sacramento—filed a lawsuit in federal court accusing the Trump administration of violating the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the right of religious people to freedom of assembly.

On Feb. 11, a separate group of 27 religious denominations and organizations filed a lawsuit making similar claims against the government.

The enthusiasm around the issue may push the legislation forward, as it languished in committee when it was last introduced in 2023.

The bill’s chances of passing either chamber, where Republicans currently hold majorities, are unclear. When Migrant Insider asked 17 Senators last month whether churches should be considered sanctuaries from immigration agents, only one Republican, Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, expressed support for the idea.

Sen. Ted Budd of North Carolina demurred, calling it a “very interesting question,” and Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana reflected on some of the history of the topic before asking the reporter to catch him on a different day.

Neither Budd nor Cassidy responded to questions from Religion News Service about whether they support the Protecting Sensitive Locations Act or barring ICE from raiding churches in general.

Faith leaders continue to raise mounting concern about the global impact of President Donald Trump’s decision to suspend operations of the U.S. Agency for International Development.

“This action threatens to reverse decades of progress in global health, education and poverty alleviation, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities,” said Emmett J. Dunn, secretary-treasurer of the Lott Carey Baptist Foreign Mission Convention.

In a statement released Feb. 9 on behalf of Lott Carey, a historically Black Baptist group, Dunn said suspension of USAID operations could have “dire consequences”—sparking “health crises” and “educational disruptions,” and jeopardizing essential humanitarian aid.

“The halt in funding has already led to the closure of field hospitals in regions like Syria, leaving millions without essential medical aid,” Dunn stated. “In countries such as South Africa, Ghana, Mali and Sudan, the freeze on aid has disrupted health services and education programs, adversely affecting vulnerable populations.”

Dunn also noted the Trump administration’s action has placed at-risk humanitarian assistance to Venezuelan refugees in Columbia and others in Latin America.

“The suspension presents significant challenges for organizations like Lott Carey, which has been responding to human needs for 127 years and is currently active in 13 countries, providing assistance in education, health care, advocacy and capacity building,” he said.

“The abrupt withdrawal of USAID support places an immense burden on our resources and capacity to fill the void left behind.”

Executive order on foreign aid

Trump issued an executive order Jan. 20 stating, “It is the policy of United States that no further United States foreign assistance shall be disbursed in a manner that is not fully aligned with the foreign policy of the President of the United States.”  

The executive order called for a “90-day pause in United States foreign development assistance for assessment of programmatic efficiencies and consistency with United States foreign policy.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a waiver Jan. 29, temporarily exempting “existing lifesaving humanitarian assistance programs” from the work stoppage during the review period.

However, with USAID staff furloughed and funding frozen, current and former agency officials told ABC News the ability of global field personnel to carry out lifesaving aid essentially has ceased for now.

Varied responses to action

Adam Russell Taylor, president of Sojourners, a Christian social justice organization, lashed out at the Trump administration for freezing USAID funds, suspending operations and furloughing employees.

“Ending USAID’s work around the world is both foreign policy malpractice and a deeply short-sighted economic move—not to mention a direct assault on the many commands from the Christian faith to love and protect the most vulnerable,” he wrote.

Ryan Denison, senior editor at Denison Ministries, offered a more nuanced response, writing “some waste and corruption are unavoidable given the scope and scale of USAID’s efforts, and the agency still does many truly great things throughout the world.”

“USAID attempted to build security by fostering dependency through a number of truly worthy endeavors—such as its work combatting global hunger, AIDS, malaria, and a host of other problems. However, its history also includes a number of acts of which we should be less proud,” Denison wrote.

For instance, USAID spent $12 billion in Syria to help people suffering from the civil war there, but “millions of dollars were stolen and diverted to armed combat groups instead of the refugees,” he stated.

“In other words, it falls right in line with most government programs in that it is plagued by corruption while still serving an important purpose.”

Review programs but don’t stop services

Eugene Cho, president and CEO of Bread for the World, a faith-based advocacy group focused on fighting hunger, agreed a review of USAID programs is appropriate, but he insisted it can be done without interrupting “lifesaving programs.”

“Moreover, in the long run, the related Stop-Work Order issued by the State Department will end up costing U.S. taxpayers, negatively affect U.S. influence globally, and, more importantly, have a devastating impact on the world’s most vulnerable people,” Cho stated.

“Among other essential programs, since the 1960s, U.S. foreign aid has been providing lifesaving nutrition assistance to tens of millions of people, specifically women and children, each year.

“Nutrition programs enable countries to improve the health of their populations and strengthen their economies while also supporting U.S. strategic interests and national security by building and maintaining relationships with partner countries and promoting regional stability.”

‘Come to the table’ and reason together

Jeremy Everett, founding executive director of the Baylor Collaborative on Hunger and Poverty, struck a similar tone, applauding the work of dedicated USAID field personnel with vulnerable people worldwide while recognizing the need to continue to improve delivery systems.

“Ironically, the populations [agency field personnel] work with are much more likely to be forced to migrate if they are not being served by these USAID programs,” Everett said in an interview.

“So, if the goal is to reduce the migrant population at the border, then what we are doing now would be counterintuitive.”

Christians who are engaged in “sustained engagement” through mission work among vulnerable communities in impoverished nations should let elected representatives know they see the value of similar relationship building through global humanitarian aid programs, he noted.

Everett called for dialogue with the Trump administration and building on past success.

As a hopeful sign, he pointed out domestic poverty rates and food insecurity rates were at record lows during the first Trump administration, and international humanitarian initiatives by the United States “kept harsh rates of hunger at bay.”

“Let’s do it again,” he urged. “There are things we can do. Come to the table and work with us.”

La Convención Bautista Hispana de Texas y Fellowship Southwest se unieron a más de dos docenas de organizaciones religiosas en una demanda que cuestiona un cambio de política que permite a los funcionarios de inmigración entrar en iglesias y otros lugares sensibles.

El 20 de enero, una directiva del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional de EE. UU. rescindió las directrices para los funcionarios de Aduanas y Protección Fronteriza y de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas que anteriormente restringían la aplicación de la ley en lugares sensibles como lugares de culto, escuelas y hospitales.

La demanda afirma que el cambio de política para la aplicación de la ley de inmigración viola tanto la Primera Enmienda como la Ley de Restauración de la Libertad Religiosa.

La demanda alega que permitir la aplicación de la ley de inmigración en lugares de culto impone una carga sustancial al libre ejercicio de la religión de los demandantes y no refleja los «medios menos restrictivos» para lograr «un interés gubernamental imperioso».

«Una acción de control de inmigración durante los servicios de culto, el trabajo ministerial u otras actividades congregacionales sería devastadora para sus prácticas religiosas», afirma la demanda.

«Destrozaría los espacios consagrados del santuario, frustraría el culto comunitario y debilitaría el alcance de los servicios sociales que son fundamentales para la expresión religiosa y la práctica espiritual de las congregaciones y los miembros de los demandantes».

El Instituto para la Defensa y Protección Constitucional de la Facultad de Derecho de Georgetown presentó la demanda (Iglesia Menonita de EE. UU. y otros contra el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional de EE. UU. y otros) el 11 de febrero en el Tribunal de Distrito de EE. UU. para el Distrito de Columbia en nombre de una amplia coalición cristiana y judía.

«Las acciones extremas de nuestro gobierno nos llaman a dar un paso adelante al reconocer que nuestra práctica de amar al prójimo supera nuestra postura tradicional de no resistencia», dijo Iris de Leon-Harshorn, de la Iglesia Menonita de EE. UU., en una llamada al mediodía con los medios de comunicación después de que se presentó la demanda.

Entre los demandantes se encuentran 12 organismos y representantes denominacionales nacionales, cuatro organismos denominacionales regionales y 11 asociaciones denominacionales e interdenominacionales.

Someter los lugares de culto a medidas de control de inmigración «sin orden judicial o circunstancias apremiantes» interfiere con la libertad de las congregaciones para practicar libremente su religión, dijo la abogada principal Kelsi Corkran.

La demanda es similar en muchos aspectos a una demanda anterior presentada por un grupo de congregaciones cuáqueras en el Tribunal de Distrito de los Estados Unidos para el Distrito de Maryland. La Cooperative Baptist Fellowship se unió a esa demanda la semana pasada.

Carga sustancial sobre el libre ejercicio de la religión

La última demanda afirma que el cambio en la política de lugares sensibles ya está suponiendo una carga sustancial para el libre ejercicio de la religión de los demandantes y su derecho a la «asociación expresiva».

«Las congregaciones están experimentando una disminución de la asistencia a los servicios religiosos y de la participación en los servicios sociales debido al temor a las medidas de control de la inmigración», afirma la demanda.

«Para los congregantes vulnerables que siguen asistiendo a los servicios religiosos, las congregaciones tienen que elegir entre exponerlos a ser arrestados o adoptar medidas de seguridad que están en tensión con sus deberes religiosos de acogida y hospitalidad».

La Convención Hispana Bautista de Texas es una «familia de iglesias dedicadas a servir a las poblaciones vulnerables y a ministrar a nuestras comunidades», dijo Jesse Rincones, director ejecutivo de la Convención.

«Valoramos profundamente el compromiso de larga data de nuestra nación de proteger el derecho constitucional de la iglesia local a llevar a cabo su misión bíblica sin interferencia del gobierno», dijo Rincones, que es pastor y abogado.

«La erosión de estas protecciones deja a nuestras congregaciones vulnerables a la intrusión del gobierno, interrumpiendo los servicios de culto, los funerales, los estudios bíblicos y otros ministerios vitales que sirven a nuestras comunidades».

Fellowship Southwest fomenta y fortalece «la misión compasiva y el trabajo profético de abogacía» de sus iglesias asociadas, dijo Stephen Reeves, director ejecutivo de Fellowship Southwest.

«Apoyamos una red activa que sirve a los migrantes todos los días, porque nos tomamos en serio las palabras de Jesús», dijo Reeves, que también es abogado.

«Toda iglesia debería poder seguir los mandatos divinos de amar a nuestro prójimo y acoger al extranjero sin temor a las intrusiones del ICE en espacios sagrados o a las represalias de funcionarios gubernamentales que no comparten nuestras convicciones religiosas».

«Todas las iglesias deben poder seguir los mandatos divinos de amar a nuestro prójimo y acoger al extranjero sin temor a las intrusiones del ICE en espacios sagrados o a las retribuciones de funcionarios gubernamentales que no comparten nuestras convicciones religiosas».

Convención Hispana Bautista de Texas and Fellowship Southwest joined more than two dozen religious organizations in a lawsuit challenging a policy change allowing immigration officers to enter churches and other sensitive locations.

On Jan. 20, a U.S. Department of Homeland Security directive rescinded guidelines for Customs and Border Protection and for Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers that previously restricted enforcement in sensitive locations such as houses of worship, schools and hospitals.

The lawsuit asserts the change in policy for immigration enforcement violates both the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The suit claims allowing immigration enforcement at places of worship imposes a substantial burden on the plaintiffs’ free exercise of religion and does not reflect the “least restrictive means” to accomplish “a compelling government interest.”

“An immigration enforcement action during worship services, ministry work, or other congregational activities would be devastating to their religious practices,” the lawsuit states.

“It would shatter the consecrated spaces of sanctuary, thwart communal worship, and undermine the social service outreach that is central to religious expression and spiritual practice for Plaintiffs’ congregations and members.”

The Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law School filed the suit—Mennonite Church USA et al v. United States Department of Homeland Security et al—Feb. 11 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on behalf of a broad-based Christian and Jewish coalition.

“The extreme actions of our government call us to step up as we recognize that our practice of loving our neighbor outweighs our traditional stance of nonresistance,” Iris de Leon-Harshorn with the Mennonite Church USA said in a noon call with news media after the suit was filed.

Plaintiffs include 12 national denominational bodies and representatives, four regional denominational bodies and 11 denominational and interdenominational associations.

Subjecting places of worship to immigration enforcement actions “without judicial warrant or exigent circumstances” interferes with congregations’ freedom to freely practice their religion, lead counsel Kelsi Corkran said.

The suit is similar in many respects to an earlier suit brought by a group of Quaker congregations in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship joined in that suit last week.

Substantial burden on free exercise of religion

The latest lawsuit claims the change in the sensitive locations policy already is placing a substantial burden on the plaintiffs’ free exercise of religion and their right to “expressive association.”

“Congregations are experiencing decreases in worship attendance and social services participation due to fear of immigration enforcement action,” the lawsuit states.

“For the vulnerable congregants who continue to attend worship services, congregations must choose between either exposing them to arrest or undertaking security measures that are in direction tension with their religious duties of welcome and hospitality.”

Convención Hispana Bautista de Texas is a “family of churches dedicated to serving vulnerable populations and ministering to our communities,” said Jesse Rincones, executive director of Convención.

“We deeply value our nation’s longstanding commitment to protecting the local church’s constitutional right to carry out its biblical mission without government interference,” said Rincones, who is both a pastor and an attorney.

“The erosion of these protections leaves our congregations vulnerable to government intrusion, disrupting worship services, funerals, Bible studies and other vital ministries that serve our communities.”

Fellowship Southwest encourages and strengthens “the compassionate mission and prophetic advocacy work” of its partnering churches, said Stephen Reeves, executive director of Fellowship Southwest.

“We support an active network serving migrants every day, because we take the words of Jesus seriously,” said Reeves, who also is an attorney.

“Every church should be able to follow the divine mandates to love our neighbors and welcome the stranger without fear of ICE intrusions into sacred spaces or retribution from government officials who don’t share our faith convictions.”