A federal appeals court has upheld protections shielding more than 1,400 houses of worship nationwide from immigration enforcement, keeping in place restrictions that have been in legal dispute since the Trump administration moved to lift them last year.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 19 to affirm a preliminary injunction barring U.S. Department of Homeland Security agents from conducting immigration enforcement “at or near” the houses of worship, which span 33 states and Washington, D.C., according to CT Mirror.
The case traces back to a January 2025 policy change in which the Trump administration reversed Biden-era guidance that had directed immigration agencies to avoid enforcement at “sensitive locations” like churches, schools and hospitals “to the fullest extent possible,” except in emergencies. The new policy instructed agents to rely on “discretion along with a healthy dose of common sense” instead, according to Maryland Matters.
A coalition of congregations — including Sikh Temple Sacramento, six Quaker yearly meetings and the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship — sued over the policy change, represented by the legal advocacy group Democracy Forward. They argued the shift had already discouraged members from attending services.
Senior Judge Barbara Milano Keenan, writing for the appeals court, found that “the plaintiffs have presented evidence showing that the 2025 Policy is having a chilling effect on their congregations and already has caused declines in attendance,” and that “this decline in attendance and increased threat of immigration enforcement already has imposed a substantial burden” on worship, per CT Mirror and Maryland Matters.
Democracy Forward said in a statement that “the court has preserved these protections while this case moves forward,” according to Maryland Matters.
DHS defended its enforcement policy in a statement to CT Mirror: “Criminals are no longer able to hide in places of worship to avoid arrest. The Trump Administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement.”
Matt O’Brien, deputy director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, criticized the ruling as “absurd” and called it “a politically-motivated decision by an activist judge,” CT Mirror reported.
The injunction remains in effect while the underlying lawsuit continues.
