Source: French to English Tester Published on: 2026-04-01
Source: The Conversation – en français– By Blandine Chelini-Pont, Professor of Contemporary History and International Relations, Aix-Marseille University (AMU)
In the United States, more and more religious institutions are mobilizing to protest against the operations of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), whose primary objective is to proceed with the expulsion of the supposed “millions of undocumented migrants” present on the country’s soil. Through legal appeals, the establishment of alert networks, and even the arrangement of churches as refuge spaces, they play a real role in defending undocumented immigrants.
While many Christian Churches haveopenly expressed their oppositionSince the war launched against Iran on February 28, for several months it has been observed that more and more American religious leaders are contesting the actions of the federal agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Far from being a temporary reaction, thismobilizationintensified throughout the year 2025, as ICE expanded across the entire territory and overstepped its administrative and criminal jurisdiction. The federal agency is normally responsible for handling immigration law violations (undocumented and irregular migrants), border removal processes (detention, expulsion), as well as investigations into transnational criminal networks involving foreigners (human trafficking, money laundering, document fraud, drug trafficking, weapons). However, it began to act while neglecting both the procedures that govern it and its obligation to cooperate with local authorities and courts.
Its field agents – including thestaff numbers have doubledand are expected to triple over the next three years – have transformed into a genuinearmed militiaacting with complete impunity forto generate revenue.
This development, perceived as a regressive drift by many religious leaders, fuels a moral criticism that leads to questioning the entire legal framework related to the fight against illegal immigration. The mobilization, strongly supported by the Catholic Church, expands into a genuine inter-Christian and interreligious network that now directly interacts with the political and judicial fields.
Catholic mobilization
While Pope Leo XIV, himself American, did not mince his words in denouncing the ongoing shift and calling formore humanity in the United States, the mobilization was first embodied in the commitment of major episcopal figures, such as the cardinalJoseph Tobin, Archbishop of Newark, a true voice for the dignity of migrants. The dioceses in the border regions, with large Hispanic populations, were particularly sensitized (let us not forget that the majority of people arrested and expelled by ICE are from Latin America).
Bishops from New Mexico, such as Bishop John Wester of Santa Fe or Bishop Peter Baldacchino of Las Cruces, have made their voices heard, as well as in Texas,Mgr Mark J. Seitz, of El Paso, who explicitly called on ICE agents to refuse to carry out unjust orders, worrying that “the border (is) now everywhere.”
Archbishop Gustavo García-Siller of San Antonio went further. Hedenounceda system that has become a “shameful industry,” structured around economic interests, notably through private detention centers. Indeed, thebudget of the ICEhas risen from about $9.7 billion (8.4 billion euros) in 2025 to over $11 billion (9.5 billion euros) in 2026. A multi-year plan, approved last October, reaches over 60 billion euros. With the increase in its staff numbers, this colossal budget is meant to allow massive expansion of detention capacities, estimated at33 billion euros.
Bishop Mario Dorsonville, former auxiliary bishop of Washington, responsible for migration issues and now deceased, had insisted in 2024 on the moral responsibility of the Church to denounce the criminalization of migrants. The remarks he made remain, today, a kind of reference for American Catholics.
In Chicago, Cardinal Blase Cupichalso denouncedthe violations by ICE of the religious freedom of the persons apprehended, emphasizing that federal authorities were unlawfully obstructing pastoral action and forbidding visits and the practice of worship to people in detention.
In New York, the cardinalTimothy Dolan, however considered close to the current government, has become a regular critic of its immigration policies.
On the ground, a dense network of religious and lay actors has been established. The Jesuits are particularly present there through figures such as the fatherChristopher Collinsor the fatherJames Martin, which combine pastoral action, media advocacy, and political engagement.
Organizations like theJesuit Refugee Service USA, in connection with the Central American countries, theCatholic Charitiesor even theNETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social Justice, file lawsuits against ICE on behalf of the “kidnapped” individuals. The action of these organizations allows transforming moral outrage into the capacity for organized action.
Inter-Christian and interreligious mobilization
Many other American churches are also making their voices heard. The Episcopal Church, under the impetus of figures likeMichael Curry(former primate) and diocesan bishops such asJohn Harvey Taylor(Los Angeles) is strongly opposed to detention policies and “raids.”More than 150 Episcopal bishopshave signed joint declarations denouncing ICE’s practices.
In the Lutheran world, theEvangelical Lutheran Church in America(ELCA), led by Yehiel Curry, is also involved, through its local synods, notably in Minnesota (where Minneapolis is located, the city where ICE agents shot in JanuaryRenee Good and Alex Pretti)where Curry is in office and where Lutherans are numerous. Their leaders also participated in legal actions to ensure pastoral access to detained migrants.
TheUnited Church of Christ, historically engaged in the struggles for civil rights, thePresbyterian Church(USA) or even theUnited Methodist Churchtake the same public positions and support the same reception networks. In the end, we witness an inter-Christian convergence of mobilization, with the organization of numerous joint actions and demonstrations.
The convergence finally goes beyond the Christian framework to be part of an interfaith dynamic. Muslim organizations such as theCouncil on American-Islamic Relations(CAIR), as well as progressive Jewish networks like theHIAS(Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society), support the religious coalitions defending migrants.
In certain cities like Chicago, Los Angeles, or Minneapolis, these interfaith coalitions organize training sessions on the rights of migrants. This strengthens the legitimacy of the mobilization by basing it on positive common principles of human dignity and justice. Above all, this mobilization prevents theevangelical leaders supporting the ICEto monopolize the media space.
A continuation of the Black Lives Matter movement
The notion of “moral resistance” deeply structures this mobilization. It refers to a historical tradition of contesting legal injustice, notably inherited from abolitionist movements and civil rights. It manifests both in discourses—editorials, sermons, public declarations—and in practices. It transforms religious actors into “moral entrepreneurs,” capable of contesting the legitimacy of a public policy in the name of higher principles.
This has recently been the case withthe commitment of Churches in the Black Lives Matter movement(BLM), against systemic racism and police violence. Religious figures such as ReverendWilliam J. Barber IIor the reverendAl Sharptonwere found in the front lines during the BLM mobilizations. Churches served as gathering places, organization centers, and sources of moral legitimacy.
In the same way, on the migration issue, churches are becoming spaces ofrefuge, of coordination and protest. The difference in the concerned publics is not so “distant,” since a racist prejudice strongly manifests behind the hunt for undocumented immigrants, with ICE agents systematically practicing “racial profiling.”
The current mobilization in favor of undocumented immigrants has deepened the inter-Christian and interfaith network, initiated within the BLM movement. It adds to street demonstrations dispersed field actions, including legal recourse and institutional procedures.
Parishes, churches, and associative networks have set up reception arrangements, sometimes within the framework of the “sanctuary churches” movement. Organizations, such asUnited We DreamorFaith in Action, collaborate with religious communities to organize alert networks in case of raids. Volunteers assist migrants in their legal procedures, finance lawyers, and maintain a presence in detention centers.
These actions reflect the shift from moral mobilization to a genuinesolidarity infrastructure, capable of concretely responding to the territorial expansion logic of the ICE.
Political impact
The religious mobilization against ICE also directly interacts with the political field. In February 2026, a group of 44 Democratic representatives — most of whom are Catholic — led by Rosa DeLauro from Connecticut, and including figures like Nancy Pelosi, Joaquin Castro, or James McGovern — haspublicly opposed to the expansion of the ICE. Their statement explicitly invoked moral and religious arguments, denouncing a policy incompatible with human dignity.
Thus, even if the House of Representatives, where the Republicans hold a slim majority (218 seats against 214), hasvoted, at the end of March, the integration of ICE into the Department of Homeland Security budget — the ministry on which ICE depends — the arguments of the Democrats, who denounce the lack of control of recruits at all levels, the “frightening” over-arming, and the disproportionate salaries, have carried weight in the Senate. Although it has a Republican majority (53 seats against 47), the latter voted on the DHS budget without including funding for ICE. To this day, ICE’s 2026 budget is blocked, even though the emergency law passed in July 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, continues to guarantee it enormous funding.
Finally, it must be emphasized that if several conservative figures, such as the Republican Speaker of the HouseMike Johnson, trying to justify migration policies with biblical references, others seem hesitant. Thus, Vice President J. D. Vance, who openly displays his Catholicism, initially mocked the bishops who were outraged by the total cuts of federal funding for grassroots associations, essentially calling them grumpy cheapskates, beforeto apologize for it, acknowledging the excessive nature of his remarks. Even if for now he shows astrong optimism about ICE’s performance, he could try to adjust his position, just as he seeks to do (and to make it known) regarding thewar in Iran…
Blandine Chelini-Pont does not work for, advise, hold shares in, or receive funds from any organization that could benefit from this article, and has declared no affiliation other than her research institution.
–ref. In the United States, the strong mobilization of religious organizations against the actions of ICE –https://theconversation.com/in-the-united-states-the-strong-mobilization-of-religious-organizations-against-the-actions-of-ICE-279380