On January 20th, 2025, reinstated President Donald J. Trump took the oath of office. Since George Washington took the oath in 1789, the tradition is for the President to put their hand on the bible. However, notably, Trump did no such thing. Was this gesture a simple mistake? Or was it symbolic of the administration to come?

The moment itself was one in which half of America was dreading and the other half was celebrating. For the people filled with dread, it signified the continuation of a political climate they felt undermines democratic values along with a fear of more division, chaos, and polarization. For the people celebrating, it marked the return of a leader they believed would restore the nation’s strength, who upholds their values and challenges the system they believe is corrupt.

The Trump administration’s immigration reforms, particularly the revocation of protections for sensitive locations, have elicited significant opposition from religious communities across the United States. Faith leaders argue that these policy changes not only compromise the sanctity of religious spaces but also instill fear among congregants, thereby hindering their mission to provide sanctuary and support to vulnerable populations.

For many people, the most concerning feature of his massive deportation initiative is his enactment of ICE raids. Trump revoked President Biden’s previous guidance for ICE enforcements which protected sensitive areas such as schools, workplaces, and churches. This policy change has led to increased enforcement actions in these areas, causing significant concern among educators, parents, employers, and clergy.

Following the policy shift, schools in various cities reported heightened anxiety among students and parents. For instance, in Chicago, there was a noticeable increase in student absences, with parents expressing fear of potential ICE raids during school hours. Workplaces across various industries have also reported growing concerns among employees and employers alike. In major metropolitan areas like New York and Chicago, restaurant and construction business owners expressed concerns about sudden labor shortages if mass detentions occur.

However, there is a wave of opposition coming from church institutions across the nation and world. Faith leaders from various denominations have openly condemned the policy shift, arguing that it not only undermines the moral and humanitarian mission of religious institutions but also instills fear in vulnerable communities. Many churches have historically served as places of refuge for undocumented individuals, offering food, shelter, and legal aid. With ICE raids now extending into these previously protected spaces, religious leaders see this as a direct attack on their mission of providing sanctuary.

Even some Evangelical Christians are urging the Trump administration to reconsider its immigration initiatives. A group of organizations consisting of the National Association of Evangelicals, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, the Council for Christian Colleges & Universities and the Evangelical refugee resettlement group World Relief sent a letter to the administration urging Trump to resume the Refugee Admissions Program.

They say that suspension of this program harms the U.S.’ ability to offer protection for people seeking to enter the country in order to practice their faith freely. More generally, they argue that the policies conflict with biblical teachings on compassion and welcoming the stranger, and that the administration’s approach to immigration is too harsh and lacks mercy. In fact, some claim that ICE raids being extended permission to enter churches infringes on the basic right to worship.

Even Rome has expressed its disapproval of the new policies. “If true, this will be a disgrace…This is not the way to solve things” said Pope Francis. The Vatican has consistently advocated for humane immigration policies, emphasizing the moral responsibility of nations to welcome and protect migrants. Pope Francis, a vocal supporter of immigrant rights, has previously criticized Trump’s harsh border policies, even going so far to call Trump “not Christian” in 2016 over his plans to build the U.S.-Mexico border wall. 

In alignment with the Pope, many Catholic bishops across the United States have expressed significant concern, advocating for policies that uphold the dignity of migrants and refugees. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops also highlighted the Church’s long-standing role in refugee resettlement, describing it as a “ministry of the Church” and reaffirming their dedication to serving vulnerable migrant populations.

But overall, the Catholic and Evangelical rebukes add to the mounting religious opposition against the administration’s immigration policies. As faith leaders across denominations continue to pressure lawmakers for reforms, the role of religious institutions in shaping the national immigration debate is becoming increasingly significant. Considering 82% of white Evangelicals and 52% of Catholics voted for Trump over Harris, why do we see such a strong opposition from religious leaders? 

One possible answer lies in the growing tension between Trump’s policies and the fundamental Christian values of compassion, mercy, and care for the vulnerable. Many evangelicals and Catholics initially supported Trump for his conservative stance on issues like abortion and religious freedom. Some even believed that the rate at which migrants are entering the country is a crisis for the United States, 70% of White Evangelical Protestants, 64% of White Catholics, and 57% of White Non-Evangelical Protestants. But if his hardline immigration policies are challenging the very teachings of Christ, which emphasize welcoming the stranger and protecting the oppressed, it’s more difficult for these organizations to stay on his side.

By revoking protections for sensitive locations such as churches and targeting immigrant families with aggressive enforcement, Trump risks alienating religious voters who believe their faith calls them to defend the dignity of all people, regardless of legal status.

However, it’s also possible the U.S.C.C.B. and the other groups mentioned above have more than just a moral obligation to oppose Trump’s policies. In fact, the U.S.C.C.B. finances more than $100 million in federal grants it receives to fund organizations that provide migration and refugee services. According to their financial statements, in recent years, federal funding was more than 95% of what the conference spent on these programs. This financial incentive reflects a different side of this organization’s argument, one in which Vice President JD Vance pointed out recently.

“I think that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops needs to actually look in the mirror a little bit and recognise that when they receive over $100 million to help resettle illegal immigrants, are they worried about humanitarian concerns? Or are they actually worried about their bottom line?” said Vance in response to Archbishop Timothy Broglio, the president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops U.S.C.C.B., who issued a statement on January 22nd objecting to several of Trump’s executive orders.

The debate over the Catholic Church’s role in immigration policy is not new, but Vance’s remarks underscore a broader tension between religious advocacy and government funding. Critics suggest that the influx of government funding complicates the Church’s position. The U.S.C.C.B. has consistently opposed restrictive immigration measures, including those championed by the Trump administration, on the grounds that such policies undermine the dignity and rights of migrants. Yet, as Vance and others contend, the financial dependency on federal grants raises questions about whether the organization’s advocacy is entirely altruistic.

This dissonance between policy and principle could cost him politically because Evangelicals and Catholics, despite their general conservative leanings, are often heterogeneous in their support. Many prioritize moral leadership, and if Trump is perceived as betraying core Christian teachings, he may see a decline in enthusiasm among faith-based voters. Religious leaders have already begun mobilizing their communities to push back against his immigration agenda, and if this opposition gains traction, it could weaken the unwavering support he has relied on from Christian conservatives in past elections.

If Trump continues on this path, he may find that his disregard for Christian humanitarian values and organizational fundings not only fuels criticism from religious institutions but also erodes the very voter base that helped secure his previous victories.