Judge Rules ICE Can Arrest Suspected Migrants Near Churches, Dismissing Religious Groups' Challenge

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit from several churches opposing the Trump administration’s decision to allow immigration agents to conduct arrests near churches. The judge ruled that the plaintiffs failed to show they suffered enough harm to move forward with their legal challenge.

U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich, appointed by former President Trump, determined that fears of dwindling attendance or potential harassment by immigration officers were "too speculative" to support their claims, according to reporting from The Washington Times.

This decision temporarily upholds the Department of Homeland Security’s reversal of a Biden-era policy, which had placed heavy restrictions on immigration enforcement activities near “sensitive locations” such as churches, hospitals, schools, daycare centers, and community centers.

Faith-based groups and educational institutions have played a key role in immigrant advocacy, often reporting “empty pews” following changes in federal immigration enforcement practices during the Trump administration. However, Judge Friedrich noted that the decrease in attendance could be tied to the administration’s broader immigration crackdown rather than the specific policy change regarding sensitive locations.

"At least on the existing record, the plaintiffs have not presented 'substantial evidence' that the policy rescission—as opposed to the administration's broader immigration crackdown—has caused the widespread congregant absences from religious services," Friedrich wrote in her ruling.

Importantly, Judge Friedrich did not issue a ruling on the overall legality or wisdom of the Trump administration’s policy shift. Instead, she based her decision solely on the churches’ lack of “standing” to sue.

In a contrast to Friedrich’s ruling, a federal judge in Maryland previously issued an injunction blocking immigration arrests near certain houses of worship that had joined a separate lawsuit.

Meanwhile, immigration enforcement actions in Boston have also drawn controversy. Earlier this month, a Boston judge found an ICE agent, Brian Sullivan, in contempt of court after he detained Wilson Martell-Lebron during an ongoing trial.

Sullivan arrested Martell-Lebron, who was accused of using a false name on a driver’s license application, as he left the courthouse. According to the Associated Press, Boston Municipal Court Judge Mark Summerville ruled that the ICE agent violated Martell-Lebron’s constitutional rights, specifically his right to due process and a fair trial.

"It’s a case of violating a defendant’s right to present at trial and confront witnesses against him," Judge Summerville said from the bench. "It couldn’t be more serious."

Following the contempt finding, the criminal charge against Martell-Lebron was dismissed. Summerville’s action could lead Suffolk County District Attorney Kevin Hayden to review the matter and consider further steps against Sullivan.

Ryan Sullivan, one of Martell-Lebron’s defense attorneys, called the agent's actions "reprehensible," adding: "Law enforcement agents have a job to see justice is done. Prosecutors have a job to see justice is done. There is no greater injustice in my mind than the government arresting someone, without identifying themselves, and preventing them from exercising their constitutionally guaranteed right to a jury trial."

Watch:

Boston has declared itself a “sanctuary city,” meaning that local authorities limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement efforts. The city’s stance has drawn sharp criticism from former Trump border chief Tom Homan and some Republican lawmakers, who argue that sanctuary policies hinder the deportation of violent offenders.

Mayor Michelle Wu, who is seeking reelection, has reaffirmed her commitment to maintaining Boston as a "welcoming" city for immigrants, stressing that municipal policies are designed to "limit cooperation" with ICE operations, according to the Associated Press.