In the United States, an increasing number of religious institutions are mobilizing to protest against the operations of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), whose primary objective is to deport supposed “millions of undocumented migrants” present in the country. Through legal recourse, setting up alert networks, or even converting churches into refuge spaces, they play a significant role in defending undocumented individuals.
While many Christian churches openly expressed their opposition to the war initiated against Iran on February 28, we have seen for several months that more and more American religious leaders are challenging the actions of federal ICE agents.
This mobilization intensified throughout 2025 as ICE expanded across the country, surpassing its administrative and criminal scope. The agency, responsible for immigration law violations, border processes, and transnational criminal investigations involving foreigners, began to neglect protocols and fail to cooperate with local authorities and jurisdictions.
Its field agents—whose numbers have doubled and are expected to triple over the next three years—have become an armed militia acting with impunity to meet quotas.
This evolution, perceived as a regressive drift by many religious leaders, fuels a moral critique leading to a questioning of all legal frameworks related to combating illegal immigration. The mobilization, strongly supported by the Catholic Church, is expanding into an inter-Christian and interreligious network that now directly interacts with the political and judicial spheres.
Catholic Mobilization
While Pope Leon XIV, an American himself, did not mince words in denouncing the current shift and calling for more humanity in the US, mobilization was first embodied in the commitment of major Episcopal figures such as Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, a strong advocate for migrant dignity. Dioceses in border regions with large Hispanic populations have been particularly sensitized (remember that the majority of ICE detainees and deportees are from Latin America).
Bishops from New Mexico like Mgr John Wester of Santa Fe and Mgr Peter Baldacchino of Las Cruces have spoken out, as has Mgr Mark J. Seitz in Texas, explicitly calling on ICE agents to refuse to carry out unjust orders, expressing concern that “the border is everywhere.” The archbishop Gustavo Garcia-Siller of San Antonio went even further, denouncing a system that has become a “shameful industry” centered on economic interests, especially through privately owned detention centers.
Archbishop Mario Dorsonville, formerly from Washington and now in charge of migration issues, stressed in 2024 the church’s moral responsibility to denounce the criminalization of migrants, words that remain a reference for American Catholics today.
In Chicago, Cardinal Blase Cupich also criticized ICE for infringing on the religious freedom of those detained, highlighting how federal authorities illegally hinder pastoral work, visits, and worship in detention facilities.
Despite his previous closeness to the current government, Cardinal Timothy Dolan in New York 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, through figures like Father Christopher Collins or Father James Martin, link pastoral action with media advocacy and political engagement.
Organizations such as the Jesuit Refugee Service USA, Catholic Charities, and the NETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social Justice are taking legal action against ICE on behalf of “those abducted.” By transforming moral indignation into organized action, these structures have enhanced the mobilization’s impact.
Inter-Christian and Interreligious Mobilization
Numerous other American churches are also making their voices heard. The Episcopal Church, under figures like Michael Curry and diocesan bishops like John Harvey Taylor (Los Angeles), strongly opposes detention policies and “raids.” Over 150 Episcopal parishes have issued joint statements condemning ICE practices.
In the Lutheran world, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), led by Yehiel Curry, is involved through local synods, particularly in Minnesota where there is a substantial Lutheran population. Lutheran leaders have also participated in legal actions to ensure pastoral access to detained migrants.
The United Church of Christ, historically engaged in civil rights struggles, along with the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the United Methodist Church, take similar public stances and support extensive reception networks. Ultimately, there is a Christian convergence in the mobilization, with numerous joint actions and demonstrations.
This convergence extends beyond Christianity to interreligious dynamics. Muslim organizations like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and progressive Jewish networks like HIAS (Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society) support the religious coalitions defending migrants.
In cities like Chicago, Los Angeles, or Minneapolis, these interfaith coalitions provide training on migrant rights, reinforcing the legitimacy of the mobilization based on shared principles of human dignity and justice. This mobilization prevents evangelical leaders supporting ICE from monopolizing the media narrative.
Continuation of the Black Lives Matter Movement
The concept of “moral resistance” deeply structures this mobilization, drawing on a historical tradition of contesting unjust practices inherited from abolitionist and civil rights movements. It is evident in speeches – editorials, sermons, public statements – and practices, transforming religious actors into “moral entrepreneurs” capable of challenging public policies on behalf of higher principles.
This has been evident with churches’ involvement in the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement against systemic racism and police violence. Religious figures like Reverend William J. Barber II or Reverend Al Sharpton have been at the forefront of BLM mobilizations. Churches have served as gathering places, organizational hubs, and moral legitimizers.
Similarly, on the migration issue, churches have become spaces for refuge, coordination, and resistance. The diverse populations affected show a strong racist bias behind ICE’s pursuit of undocumented individuals, with agents systematically practicing “criminal deportation.”
The current mobilization in support of undocumented immigrants has deepened the Christian and interfaith network initiated in the BLM movement. It adds practical actions on the ground, including legal recourse and institutional procedures, to street demonstrations.
Parishes, churches, and associational networks have established reception facilities, sometimes within the framework of the “sanctuary churches” movement. Organizations like United We Dream or Faith in Action collaborate with religious communities to set up alert networks in case of raids. Volunteers assist migrants in legal procedures, fund lawyers, and provide support in detention centers.
These actions translate a moral mobilization into a real solidarity infrastructure capable of concretely countering the ICE’s territorial expansion logic.
Political Impact
Religious anti-ICE mobilization also directly interacts with the political realm. In February 2026, a group of 44 Democratic representatives—mostly Catholics—led by Rosa DeLauro from Connecticut, and including figures like Nancy Pelosi, Joaquin Castro, or James McGovern, publicly opposed the expansion of ICE. Their statement explicitly invoked moral and religious arguments, denouncing a policy incompatible with human dignity.
Thus, even though the House of Representatives, where Republicans have a narrow majority (218 seats to 214), voted in late March to integrate ICE into the Department of Homeland Security budget—the department overseeing ICE—the Democrats’ arguments criticizing the lack of recruit control, excessive armament, and disproportionate salaries gained traction in the Senate. Despite being Republican-majority (53 seats to 47), the Senate approved the DHS budget without funding for ICE. As of today, the 2026 ICE budget is blocked, even though the One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed in July 2025 continues to provide substantial funding.
Finally, it is noteworthy that while several conservative figures, like House Republican Speaker Mike Johnson, attempt to justify migration policies with references to scripture, others seem to hesitate. Vice President J.D. Vance, a proud Catholic, initially mocked churches protesting total federal budget cuts for field associations, before apologizing for the exaggeration of his statements. While he currently expresses strong optimism about ICE’s performance, he might try to adjust his position, as he does on other issues like the war in Iran.
