Religious groups challenge order allowing on-site raids

At the beginning of 2025, churches, synagogues and mosques in Indiana and around the country were on the list of protected areas, deemed off limits for federal immigration-related arrests and raids.

That quickly changed after President Donald Trump took office Jan. 20.

The Department of Homeland Security issued a memo calling for the rescission of the 2021 Biden-era DHS “sensitive locations” policy that had restricted Immigration and Customs Enforcement from conducting immigration raids, arrests, and other enforcement actions at houses of worship.

A coalition of 27 religious organizations filed a federal lawsuit in the District of Columbia earlier this month to challenge the new policy, arguing that DHS had for more than 30 years “substantially restricted immigration enforcement action in or near places of worship” and “an immigration enforcement action during worship services, ministry work, or other congregational activities would be devastating to their religious practice.”

In a similar case, a federal judge in Maryland on Monday preliminarily blocked implementation of the new policy for houses of worship for Quakers, a Georgia-based network of Baptist churches and a Sikh temple in California. But the vast majority of churches and temples from other religious traditions remain subject to potential raids.

The Right Rev. Jennifer Baskerville-Burrows, bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Indianapolis, acknowledged there is a great deal of concern among churches within her diocese about the Trump administration’s new policy.

“Our primary concern is that people can come into their house of worship and feel safe to do so,” Baskerville-Burrows said.

The broader lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington D.C., also argues that the rescission of the sensitive locations policy is already substantially burdening the religious exercise of the plaintiffs’ congregations and infringes on the groups’ religious freedom and ability to minister to migrants, including those in the United States illegally.

“Congregations are experiencing decreases in worship attendance and social services participation due to fear of immigration enforcement action. 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 direct tension with their religious duties of welcome and hospitality,” according to the lawsuit.

Sarah Burrow, director at Lewis & Kappes and president of the Indiana chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said that faith-based organizations not only provide places to worship, but also offer food pantries, English as a Second Language classes, community centers and other features to support their members.

“They serve vulnerable populations in a myriad of ways,” Burrow said.

State leaders have remained mostly silent on the possibliity of ICE raids and arrests at places of worship, even as they applauded Trump’s overall crackdown on illegal immigration and pledged the state’s help in enforcement actions.

Indiana Gov. Mike Braun issued an executive order in January, a week after the federal rescission of its sensitive locations policy, that promised to assist the Trump administration on immigration enforcement by “offering full cooperation with the federal government.”

“Over the last four years, the increase in illegal aliens flooding our country has created a significant threat to public safety for Hoosiers and allowed bad actors to abuse American generosity, costing taxpayers at every level. That ends now,” Braun said in the order. “Indiana will cooperate fully with the federal government, offering the assistance of the Indiana National Guard while strengthening our own efforts at home to keep illegal aliens with criminal histories out of our communities.”

Braun’s order did not explicitly mention the sensitive locations policy or cooperating with potential ICE enforcement actions at churches, schools or hospitals.

“To date, since the Executive Order has been issued, there has been no request for ICE assistance at houses of worship in Indiana,” said Molly Craft, Braun’s communications deputy chief of staff, in response to an inquiry from The Indiana Lawyer.

A spokesperson from Attorney General Todd Rokita’s office told The Lawyer that Braun’s executive order was directed to state law enforcement.

“Our office does not direct local law enforcement, except to enforce state law if they are not cooperating with ICE,” the spokesperson said in an email.

Rokita has issued warnings to the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department and Indianapolis Public Schools about what he described as those agencies’ legal requirements to cooperate with federal officials in enforcing new immigration-related orders.

His office announced that he advised IMPD and IPS to “discontinue policies and practices that limit their ability to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, or else face legal action from his office.”

Lawsuit includes 27 religious groups

The National Immigration Law Center reported that, even with the shift in policy, ICE will still need a warrant to enter previously protected areas within a house of worship, but only for places within those areas that are considered private, since the Fourth Amendment protects areas where people have a “reasonable expectation of privacy.”

“In the context of protected areas, areas open to the public such as lobbies, waiting areas and parking lots are considered public, while interior areas and those marked “private” with a sign are considered private. For immigration enforcement to search or enter a private area within a formerly protected area, the Fourth Amendment requires a valid judicial warrant signed by a federal judge unless staff at those areas consent to the search,” the center stated.

The Episcopal Church is one of the 27 religious groups that joined the lawsuit.

Baskerville-Burrows said the Indianapolis diocese has not seen a noticeable decline in church attendance numbers but has heard from members about the “high anxiety” they feel about attending services.

“There has been a shift in how people feel about coming to church,” Baskerville-Burrows said.

Another of the groups, Mennonite Church USA, bills itself as the largest Mennonite denomination in the United States with approximately 530 congregations and 62,000 members.

The church has one of its main offices based in Elkhart.

The Rev. Iris de León-Hartshorn, Mennonite Church USA’s associate executive director of operations, said there’s all sorts of reasons people come to the United States from other countries.

De León-Hartshorn said her church has always emphasized the need to help immigrants wherever it could. But she said some have relayed fears about attending services.

“Those that want to come to worship, they don’t feel safe,” she said.

Guidance offered for churches in case of ICE raid

Other religious groups in the lawsuit range from the Union for Reform Judaism to the Unitarian Universalists.

The Roman Catholic Church is not one of the lawsuit’s plaintiffs, but Pope Francis has been outspoken in his criticism of American immigration policy under Trump.

The pope issued a letter that acknowledged nations have the right to defend themselves and keep their communities safe from criminals.

“That said, the act of deporting people who in many cases have left their own land for reasons of extreme poverty, insecurity, exploitation, persecution or serious deterioration of the environment, damages the dignity of many men and women, and of entire families, and places them in a state of particular vulnerability and defenselessness,” he wrote.

His criticism drew a pointed response from U.S. border czar Tom Homan.

Homan said the pope should fix the Catholic Church and leave U.S. border protection to his department, the Associated Press reported.

“He wants to attack us for securing our border. He’s got a wall around the Vatican, does he not?” Homan told reporters in a video from The Hill posted on X. “So he’s got a wall around that protects his people and himself, but we can’t have a wall around the United States.”

Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso, Texas, who chairs the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ migration committee, said the pope’s letter provided much needed encouragement as the church deals “with these very threatening circumstances towards immigrants, towards our immigrant brothers and sisters, and also towards those who assist them in any way.”

Sally Krause, communications director for the Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis, declined to comment on the issue, noting that it is not a party to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit argues the DHS rescission of protected areas is a violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, with the plaintiffs requesting a preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting DHS from carrying out immigration enforcement activities at places of worship or during religious ceremonies, absent exigent circumstances or the existence and planned execution of a judicial warrant.

It also calls for an order setting aside, vacating, and remanding the DHS memo.

In the meantime, some churches and legal aid organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, have issued guidance related to immigration enforcement at houses of worship.

Burrow pointed to advice provided online by churches like the United Church of Christ—one of the plaintiffs in the D.C. lawsuit—on how to prepare for any possible ICE enforcement actions.

The church stresses that sanctuary is not a legal concept in U.S. law and no law prohibits immigration enforcement actions, or any other law enforcement actions, from taking place in a house of worship.

The UCC encourages churches to make plans ahead of time, with any plan to include the training of workers/volunteers who are likely to be at the church, and analyzing the church’s private and public areas, as ICE cannot go into the private areas of a church without a judicial warrant.

The denomination also advises congregations to identify and consult with an immigration attorney who can be called by church workers or volunteers if ICE shows up.

“ICE must have a judicial warrant to enter private spaces of a church. You may ask to see the warrant before allowing ICE in. A judicial warrant is issued by a court and signed by a judge and describes the location that can be entered with the warrant. It is different from administrative warrants that may be issued by ICE or another federal agency with the name of an individual to be arrested,” the UCC website states.

The UCC added that a church can refuse to allow ICE access to private areas of the church without a judicial warrant and no one at the church is required to talk to ICE, give ICE agents any information, or say anything about anyone’s immigration status.

Burrow said it’s devastating that places of worship, schools and hospitals have to consider the possibility of immigration raids on their premises, instead of focusing on their primary missions.

“It’s counterproductive. And in my personal opinion, it’s un-American,” Burrow said.

De León-Hartshorn said Mennonite Church USA tells its members that there is no universal answer for them on how to be safe.

Mennonite Church USA members are told they need to be connected to local organizations, advocates and attorneys that deal directly with immigration matters.•