Dear Central Committee Members & Observers:
Injunction denied-- The hearing on our litigation was last Friday and I learned a few minutes ago that our request for an injunction was denied. ICE will not be barred from conducting enforcement operations in places of worship while our lawsuit continues through the court system. You can learn more about the reasons why below:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/federal-judge-refuses-block-immigration-enforcement-operations-houses-rcna200918
https://anabaptistworld.org/judge-refuses-to-block-immigration-enforcement-operations-in-places-of-worship/#:~:text=a%20preliminary%20injunction.-,Mennonite%20Church%20USA%20et%20al.%20v.%20United%20States%20Department%20of,raids%20in%20places%20of%20worship.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-judge-will-not-curb-immigration-enforcement-places-worship-2025-04-11/
What you will see in the articles is that the judge largely found the potential harms to our communities were speculative, since there have been few actual ICE raids at houses of worship so far. Fear, declines the number of people attending worship and receiving social services (reported as very significant at some locations), and the diversion of resources to deal with potential ICE enforcement actions are not sufficient at this time to demonstrate harm. This is a different outcome than the first litigation brought by the Quakers of BYM, PhlYM, NEYM, Cooperative Baptists and Sikhs where at least a narrow injunction was granted.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-judge-immigration-arrests-places-of-worship-quakers-baptists-sikhs/
The injunction being denied does not mean the case is over. This was just the injunction request. However, it is still very troubling and leaves Meeting Houses outside of BYM, PhlYM and NEYM vulnerable along with the churches and synagogues of our faith partners. At the moment, I have not been advised as to the implications of this for the larger case and I have been advised, in general, not to speculate. I do want to emphasize that the legal team that represents us was extremely well prepared and presented what seemed like a strong case. I am grateful to our legal team. I'm also grateful to our faith partners in the litigation who showed up in numbers for the hearing. The benches that were available were just about full.
Regardless of this particular outcome, it is important that we stood up and that we continue to stand up every chance we get. Standing up potentially slows the erosion of the rule of law. Every action matters.
Next Steps— Our legal team is examining where to take this next. I imagine we will have new guidance from them in the next week or so.
Concerning Lobbying-- While our primary concern is the litigation, we are also part of an effort to encourage the adoption of the Protecting Sensitive Locations Act, H.R. 1061. If passed, this would essentially make the old sensitive locations rules into a law, which would be much stronger protection for our houses of worship than simply restoring the old administrative rules. Like the rescinded rules, this act would also protect hospitals and schools.
From the plaintiff participants, several of us volunteered to lobby congressional and senatorial offices about H.R. 1061. I spent last Thursday with Mennonite, Presbyterian, Evangelical Lutheran and several other denominational and interfaith leaders going from office to office on the Hill. This was arranged for us by Jim Simpson from the Center on Faith & Justice at Georgetown. They are partners of ICAP who are fighting the litigation for us. FCNL provided space for our initial briefings before we started lobbying. Gratitude to FCNL.
We visited both Democratic and Republican offices. We were received openly by all offices. We were advised by multiple offices that the passage of this bill is unlikely in the current climate-- even though some Republicans support some aspects of the bill. I will also share that some congressional staffers asked us as people of faith to hold all congressional staffers with compassion, regardless of party, during this stressful and difficult time. There was also a strong request from one congressional office that, as faith leaders, we need to help mobilize our churches and synagogues to oppose not only ICE enforcement efforts but the overall erosion of civil rights. There was enormous concern openly named that things are getting worse quickly.
After the hearing on Friday, the assembled faith leaders talked about continued interfaith cooperation. I would say there were 40-50 of us in the room from the 27 plaintiff organizations. There were enormous concerns about immigration, the erosion of the rule of law, and specific negative actions like reductions in SNAP benefits and food aid to food banks. While we did not have time to forge a framework for continued cooperation, there was general agreement that we need to cooperate going forward. As Friends, in conjunction with FCNL and AFSC, we need to talk about what this could look like.
Concerning the Vigil-- The prayer vigil that was held the night before the hearing at National City Christian Church in Washington, DC was very special. I'm not sure how many people were in person. I would imagine at least 200. Online I was told there were more than 1600 attenders. Part of what the vigil demonstrated was not simply support for the litigation, but the need so many of us felt to ground ourselves, during a really challenging time, in the core of our faith traditions. The theme for the night was "We Need Each Other." It was hopeful to experience the solidarity of so many faith communities joined together around our shared understanding that our faiths require us to stand up for human rights and human dignity.
Thank you all for your support and solidarity as we continue to try respond faithfully in these unprecedented times.
Prayerfully,
Barry Crossno (He/Him)
General Secretary
Friends General Conference
1216 Arch St. #2B
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Office Hours: Eastern Time Zone: M-F 9-5pm
(215) 561-1700 x3003
www.FGCquaker.org
.jpg)