On The Front Lines

When Worship Makes You a Target: ICE Raids in Churches Pose Significant Threat to First Amendment & Religious Liberty

RICHMOND, Va — The Rutherford Institute is calling out the double standard inherent in the government’s willingness to prosecute political protesters for disrupting worship services while allowing ICE agents broad discretion to disrupt those same services by carrying out immigration enforcement operations inside churches, temples, and other sacred spaces.

From the earliest days of the Republic, houses of worship have occupied a unique place in American life as spaces set apart for the free exercise of religion. The First Amendment was adopted to prevent the government from intruding into matters of faith or coercing religious practice through fear or force. As The Rutherford Institute warns, that historic boundary is now at risk.

Until Trump’s second term, the Department of Homeland Security treated houses of worship as protected locations, permitting enforcement actions only under exigent circumstances or with prior agency approval. That policy has now been rescinded, leaving the decision entirely to the discretion of individual officers in the field. In an amicus brief filed in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends v. DHS, The Rutherford Institute is urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to impose clear constitutional limits on ICE and Border Patrol agents’ authority to enter sacred spaces. The Institute argues that granting ICE agents unilateral discretion to conduct enforcement operations inside houses of worship violates the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) by chilling the free exercise of religion.

“Churches, synagogues, temples and mosques have long stood as places where individuals can gather to worship without fear of government intrusion,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People. “When armed ICE agents are empowered to enter houses of worship without a judicial warrant or exigent circumstances, it sends a chilling message that no space is beyond the reach of the police state.”

The policy change removing these longstanding religious freedom guardrails, directed by President Trump, was challenged by members of three faith communities—Quakers, Cooperative Baptists, and Sikhs—who allege that the new DHS approach violates their First Amendment rights and RFRA protections. They argue that the threat of immigration raids has already reduced attendance at services and undermined their ability to practice their faith traditions freely.

For Quakers, whose pacifist beliefs reject violence, the presence of armed ICE agents in or near Quaker meeting houses is fundamentally at odds with their religious convictions. Cooperative Baptists, whose faith compels them to offer radical hospitality to immigrants and refugees, report locking their church doors and no longer encouraging immigrant neighbors to attend services out of fear that worship could become a site of enforcement. Sikh congregations, which teach that all must be welcomed into their places of worship without fear, say even members with lawful status have expressed uncertainty about whether it is safe to attend services.

Recognizing the constitutional concerns, the district court issued a preliminary injunction requiring DHS to adhere to its prior policy at the plaintiffs’ places of worship. The federal government appealed, and the plaintiffs are seeking broader relief in their lawsuit to prevent ICE from conducting raids at houses of worship absent a judicial warrant or exigent circumstances.

Joshua C. McDaniel, Parker W. Knight III, Kathryn F. Mahoney, and Steven W. Burnett with Harvard Law School’s Religious Freedom Clinic advanced the arguments in the amicus brief.

The Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties organization, defends individuals whose constitutional rights have been threatened or violated and educates the public on a wide spectrum of issues affecting their freedoms.