A sudden fondness for free exercise

While running for president, Donald Trump lambasted the weaponization of the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI. Exhibit A for these abuses was often the FBI Richmond Office’s memorandum on the pro-life terrorists supposedly lurking inside traditionalist Catholic churches. The president ran on ending these sorts of abuses, but now liberal-leaning churches have sued his administration after the repeal of the “sensitive places” policy of the Biden Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency, which prohibited immigration enforcement actions in, among other places, houses of worship.

Liberal-leaning churches, anxious to show their solidarity with illegal immigrants, have discovered the First Amendment and now assert a religious liberty right to host illegal immigrants free from the threat of an ICE raid.

This is, of course, a largely manufactured crisis, meant to make liberals feel good rather than to accomplish anything substantive. The original policy barred enforcement actions in schools (both K-12 and higher education), hospitals, religious institutions, and public demonstrations except for exigent circumstances. A later iteration added social service establishments and other places where children gather. Of course, conservatives have been calling for immigration enforcement in institutions of higher education that harbor violent and destructive student activists who target Israel with unlawful campus demonstrations. So repealing the sensitive spaces policy was likely a necessary step to authorize ICE to act when it identifies radicals camped out on campus.

Nevertheless, 27 churches and church bodies rushed to court seeking an injunction against the policy’s repeal, and they include a who’s who of the mainline denominations: Mennonites, United Church of Christ, Disciples of Christ, Brethren, Episcopalians, Quakers, Presbyterian Church (USA), United Methodist Church, and the Unitarian Universalist Association. They are all represented by an institute at Georgetown University Law Center. These denominations, which are often strong believers in the wall of separation between church and state and rarely show up to defend a robust right to religious liberty, are suddenly enthusiastic supporters of the First Amendment’s free exercise clause and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act when those provisions could allow them to harbor illegal immigrants.

The Trump Administration announced that the policy’s repeal would simply end a “bright line rule” with an admonition to agents to use “a healthy dose of common sense” when approaching sensitive spaces.

We as religious conservatives should take a back seat to no one on the importance of houses of worship as spaces free and separate from government control. And that includes not only what happens on Sunday morning, but social service ministries that provide food banks or pregnancy resources Monday through Saturday as well. We were the ones who called out a prior rhetorical shift by the Obama administration to talk about “freedom to worship” instead of a broader “freedom of religion” that encompasses everything done from faith.

On the other hand, we are citizens of two kingdoms, and recognize the appropriate role of the government in law enforcement (most especially seen in Romans 13). Whether in Les Miserables or Disney’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame, it may be a nice thought to suggest that churches have a historic privilege to offer sanctuary from law enforcement, but that’s not written in the law anywhere. Church buildings are not extraterritorial spaces like embassies where lawbreakers can hole up for years to avoid capture or extradition.

Where does this leave us? I think for now, we trust that ICE acts with “common sense” until we see otherwise. If Spanish-language churches report a sudden surge in police interest at church sites rounding up large numbers of congregants, that could be an appropriate topic to engage with the administration—there may be other places (Home Depot parking lots) where such actions could be taken without compromising worship services. If, however, the primary effect of the policy’s repeal is to empower ICE to act against unruly and violent campus demonstrators without proper visas, I will applaud the administration’s actions. And in the meantime, I’ll enjoy seeing all these liberal denominations’ enthusiastic embrace of free exercise.