Religious Freedom and Immigration
The following is a talk give by Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades at ND Law School on November 17, 2025.
I’d like to begin by thanking Professor John Meiser for the kind invitation to speak to you today and to thank Dean Marcus Cole and the Notre Dame Law School’s Religious Liberty Clinic for all you are doing to serve the cause of religious liberty in our nation and beyond.
I’ve been asked to speak on the topic of religious liberty and immigration. During these past two years of my service as Chair of the USCCB Committee on Religious Liberty, the topic of immigration and religious liberty has been one of our top areas of concern. Last week, during the plenary assembly of the USCCB in Baltimore, you may have seen in the news the strong statement of the US Bishops on the immigration situation in the United States today. Due to the urgency of this matter, we issued what is called a ”Special Message” addressing the evolving situation impacting immigrants in the United States. It has been 12 years since we last issued a “special message” due to a particularly urgent situation. At that time, the message was issued in response to the federal government’s contraceptive mandate, another religious liberty issue.
In last week’s special message on immigration, we expressed our strong opposition to the indiscriminate mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. We expressed our serious concerns for the welfare of immigrants living in fear and anxiety around questions of profiling and immigration enforcement, along with the vilification of immigrants. We expressed our deep concern for families that have been divided due to deportation. As we have for at least three decades, we called for a meaningful reform of our nation’s immigration laws and procedures. We recognize our nation’s responsibility to regulate its borders and to have a just and orderly immigration system for the common good. We not that “without such processes, immigrants face the risk of trafficking and other forms of exploitation.” On the religious liberty front, the special message states: “We are troubled by threats against the sanctity of houses of worship and the special nature of hospitals and schools,” which I will talk about shortly. On the religious liberty front, the statement also says: “We are concerned about the conditions in detention centers and the lack of access to pastoral care.” I will also talk about this. But I’d like to begin by talking about another issue that has been at the forefront of our concerns about religious liberty and immigration the past few years, namely, the right of the Church to provide charitable services to immigrants.
Two years ago, the USCCB Committee on Religious Liberty began to issue an annual report in which we look at The State of Religious Liberty in the United States, summarizing developments at the federal level in the past year and then preview developments we foresee in the coming year. We identify our areas of critical concern, threats to religious liberty and recommendations for a response to those threats, as well as opportunities. In both of our first two annual reports, in January 2024 and in January 2025, we highlight immigration. Our concern was primarily on efforts to restrict the ability of Catholic ministries to serve migrants, an important work of the Church involving corporal works of mercy that are part of our mission as disciples of Christ. In the 2024 report, we noted how our religious charities serving immigrants found themselves the targets of intense anger, largely motivated by misinformation and partisan rhetoric related to the US- Mexico border. There were calls for the government to penalize these charities, primarily through proposed restrictions on their access to programs and funding opportunities, and eventually some extremists calling for violence against the charities’ employees. In our second annual report this past January, we noted the proposed Secure the Border Act which would restrict religious organization’s from accessing federal funding for its services to migrants. It would defund any organization that it says ‘facilitates or encourages unlawful activity, including unlawful entry.” We vigorously opposed this proposed legislation because it considered our providing humanitarian aid like food, water, and shelter as facilitation of unlawful entry. It would defund transportation, lodging, or immigration legal services to undocumented immigrants. This legislation passed the House of Representatives but was not acted upon by the Senate during the 118th Congress.
Things really heated up in 2024 when the Attorney General of Texas challenged a Catholic ministry to immigrants, Annunciation House in El Paso. Officials from his office went to Annunciation House and demanded to inspect their records. Annunciation House sought a court order allowing them time to verify what records could be disclosed, and then the Attorney General countersued AH for violation of a Texas statute requiring that his office be given immediate access to the records of any entity registered to operate in the state. The suit sought to close Annunciation house under that statute. The court sided with Annunciation House and dismissed the state’s attempt to shut it down, but then this past May, the Texas Supreme Court allowed the AG to proceed with his investigation into Annunciation House, not ruling on the underlying merits of the case, but simply allowing the investigation to continue. It said that the state’s religious freedom restoration act does not bar the AG’s claim from being filed. The case was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings on the merits, so the legal battle is not over. The AG continues to claim that AH is violating a state law against harboring undocumented immigrants, which AH denies. AH argues that providing shelter to persons who happen to be immigrants should not be seen as illegal harboring of undocumented immigrants. I made a statement last year that “we must preserve the freedom of Catholics and other people of faith to assist their communities and meet migrants’ basic human needs. Incidentally, AG Paxton also argued that AH is not a religious organization since Masses there are infrequent, confessions are not heard, baptisms aren’t celebrated, etc. Paxton also began investigations into Catholic Charities of the Rio Grande Valley which provides charitable services to immigrants. In coordination with the federal government, Catholic Charities provides shelter and other services to asylum seekers. In August, the 15th Court of Appeals in Texas denied the AG’s petition to depose the leaders of Catholic Charities of the Rio Grande Valley, saying that CC had cooperated sufficiently with the state’s investigation into its charitable work.
In our annual report this past January, our USCCB Committee on Religious Liberty continued to identify the targeting of the Church’s immigration services as a threat to our religious liberty, seeking to prevent us from serving immigrants and refugees. We wrote: “When a person comes before us, we don’t check their papers before serving them as Christ taught. Rather, we recognize their inherent God-given dignity and the reality that, as Pope Benedict XVI wrote, ‘every migrant is a human person who, as such, possesses fundamental, inalienable rights that must be respected by everyone and in every circumstance’ (Caritas in Veritate, 62).” “Ministry to migrants is not peripheral to the work of the Church.” It is part of Christian discipleship. As a response to this ongoing threat to our religious liberty, the USCCB has been active in advocating for the rights of our religious charities to serve migrants. We have tried to advocate with Congress “to clarify that merely serving vulnerable persons does not constitute ‘harboring’ and that religious charities have the freedom to serve without discriminating on the basis of immigration status.”
Regarding our charitable services to migrants, last year, the last year of President Biden’s administration, we also had to deal with a rule from the HHS Office of Refugee Resettlement regarding treatment of unaccompanied and migrant children. The rule required the provision of interstate transportation for medical services, in which they included abortion. The final rule also construed to impose requirements with regard to so-called “gender-affirming care.” We obviously have religious liberty concerns since the rule does not require any accommodations for the religious liberty of religious providers.
A new threat to religious liberty that has arisen these past several months, which we did not foresee last year, has to do with the immigration enforcement. Specifically, the Trump Administration has rescinded the previous guidance regarding protected areas for non-emergency immigrant enforcement in places of worship. Schools, social services, health care services, or other sensitive settings. In September, the USCCB filed an amicus brief in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in the case Mennonite Church US, et al. vs. DHS. The suit challenges the Department of Homeland Security’s rescission of its longstanding policy of generally refraining from immigration enforcement actions at houses of worship, among other sensitive areas like hospitals and schools. The suit argues that the policy’s recission violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, noting decrased attendance at religious services and conscience injuries they have been obligated to incur, such as locking doors during services. The district court ruled that the denominations lack standing, reasoning that these harms are not traceable to any imminent threat of enforcement. The USCCB’s brief focuses on how the district court’s dismissal of the denominations’ conscience injuries intrudes on church autonomy. By second-guessing the need for the denominations to take such measures, the USCCB argues, the court is inserting itself into questions of pastoral discretion and church governance. (SEE AMICUS BRIEF). Staff are also assessing legislative efforts that could address this issue. The Protecting Sensitive Locations Act was reintroduced in both the House and Senate this past February. The bill would codify the DHS policy that was rescinded by the Trump administration. The USCCB supported an earlier version of this bill in 2017. The current bill does not have any Republican co[sponsors and is unlikely to move forward. However, the House Appropriations Committee adopted language on a bipartisan basis encouraging ICE to evaluate sensitive locations when conducting immigration enforcement operation, and we have urged this language to be included as part of the final DHS appropriations report language.
Another very important religious liberty arose in recent months regarding access to the sacraments and to pastoral and spiritual care for immigrants in detention. This issue was resolved successfully at the so-called Alligator Alcatraz detention center in Florida, thanks to the efforts of Archbishop Wenski and others. Then, the issue arose again in Chicago. There was a Eucharistic procession to an ICE facility there, where the organizers requested to bring Holy Communion to detainees and were denied entry. On its social media, DHS addressed this incident, stating that “there is a proper protocol and processes for entering an ICE facility. Our ICE facility is under siege by violence(rioters) amid a government shutdown. Our ICE staff informed the Coalition for Spiritual and Public Leadership that the Broadway processing center was not able to accommodate visitors on such short notice, for their safety as well as that of detainees and staff.” Personally, I did not feel a public statement from me or our Committee was warranted in this situation, however, later, after following the proper protocols, an auxiliary bishop of Chicago and Chicago priests were denied access, which led me to issue a public statement. We will continue to work on this issue of religious liberty: access to the sacraments and pastoral ministry for immigrants in detention centers.
I expect that the Committee’s annual report this coming January or February will continue to name immigration as one of our priority critical concerns in the area of religious liberty for this coming year, focusing especially on the administration’s change in policy for immigration enforcement at sensitive locations, like our churches, and also on access to the sacraments and pastoral care in detention centers. Incidentally, two dioceses have taken the extraordinary step of dispensing the faithful from their Sunday obligation if they feel that going to Mass exposes them to risk of detention. Detainees have, at times, have found their access to the sacraments and pastoral care unnecessarily inhibited. As new immigration operations begin, and new temporary detention centers are erected, these kinds of threats will persist. We will need to continue to insist on respect for the fundamental rights of immigrants, including the right to religious liberty. And the right of the Church to serve and minister to immigrants. This is all in accord with the Church’s teaching on religious liberty as described in Dignitas Humanae of the Second Vatican Council, as the right of the human person to be free from coercion in religious matters. This is a right rooted in human dignity and includes the freedom to practice one’s religion privately, publicly, and to share it with others, provided that the just public order is observed. So, the exercise of this right can be limited to protect the common good, including public safety, public peace, and public morality but these limitations must be justly applied.
Finally, I must say a brief word on religious persecution in the world today. As we think about the threats to religious freedom in our nation, we must not forget the very dire situation of millions of people persecuted for their faith throughout the world, including millions of Christians. I am very saddened by the extremely restricted refugee policy of our present Administration that has so severely reduced the number of refugees admitted into our country, including people suffering severe religious persecution. We will be admitting the fewest number of refugees into our country in many decades, with a ceiling of 7,500 admittances. This number prioritizes white Afrikaners from South African. We have so many Christians in refugee camps and in very terrible situations who will not be able to come to the U.S. I find this extremely troubling. Though it is not directly a religious liberty issue for us as Americans, but we are members of the human family and we must not ignore others, including those who are our own Catholic and Christian brothers and sisters around the world whose freedom is denied and also those whose lives are even at risk for practicing their faith. In our own diocese, we have successfully resettled thousands of refugees in recent decades, many of whom had been persecuted for their faith in their home countries. It is heartbreaking that so many who had the hope for religious freedom by emigrating here are not without that hope. May we continue to pray for them and work for more generous and welcoming immigration and refugee policies that prioritize those who seek to escape horrific situations of war, violence, extreme poverty, and oppression and persecution because of their religious beliefs.
Thank you for your attention and for this opportunity to share with you about our efforts to promote and defend the religious liberty for our immigrant brothers and sisters and for the Church in her living her mission of service to immigrants in our country.