The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has blocked warrantless immigration enforcement at houses of worship, finding that the Trump administration’s 2025 policy permitting such actions violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). The three-judge panel unanimously found that churches proved they were likely losing congregants because of the DHS policy, and that the more aggressive arrest approach placed a burden on the exercise of religion that the government did not adequately justify.
What changed
The Trump Homeland Security policy allowing ICE more freedom to make warrantless arrests at houses of worship tramples on the religious rights of migrants, churches, temples and mosques, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday. The appeals court found evidence that the 2025 policy has caused a reduction in attendance at the plaintiffs’ houses of worship, which constitutes irreparable injury.
The Justice Department did not make certain defenses in the lower court, and the appeals court said the government waived that argument, with Judge Steven Agee calling it an “inexplicable failure” on the part of the government.
Why it matters
This decision is significant for practitioners because it establishes Fourth Circuit precedent that houses of worship enjoy special protection under RFRA when DHS enforces immigration law. The ruling applies only to houses of worship, not other sensitive locations, and only to the plaintiffs in the case, though arrests are still possible in exigent circumstances or when agents already have an arrest warrant.
The appellate reversal means that religious organizations challenging the 2025 policy change in the Fourth Circuit can point to a binding appellate standard: they need to show concrete harm to congregation attendance and demonstrate that the government’s burden on religious exercise is not adequately justified. The government’s failure to mount a full defense in the district court proceeding cost it on appeal.
For practitioners representing clients with ties to houses of worship, this narrows the scope where warrantless ICE enforcement can proceed. For those advising religious institutions on immigration matters, the ruling signals that RFRA protections may apply when a congregation’s religious practice is demonstrably burdened by the policy.
Way forward
-
If you represent a faith-based organization in the Fourth Circuit: Review the opinion for the specific findings about harm to worship attendance and gather similar evidence if you plan to challenge the DHS policy further. The court emphasized documentary evidence of reduced attendance.
-
If you advise immigrants or congregation members: Make clear that the Fourth Circuit ruling applies only to the specific plaintiffs’ houses of worship (Quaker meetings, Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, and Sikh Temple Sacramento). Enforcement may still occur at other houses of worship outside this limited scope, and certainly in exigent circumstances or with an arrest warrant.
-
If you represent DHS or ICE: Prepare complete RFRA defenses early in litigation. The Fourth Circuit faulted the government for not mounting a full justification at the district court stage, finding that waiver fatal to its position on appeal.
-
Check your circuit: This ruling binds the Fourth Circuit (Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Maryland, and parts of West Virginia). Practitioners outside the Fourth Circuit should monitor developments in other circuits, as conflicting precedent exists.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. We are a software company, not a law firm. Always consult a licensed immigration attorney for advice specific to your situation. Verify all citations and policy details against the primary source linked above. Immigration policy can change without notice; check the latest guidance from USCIS, DHS, and the courts for current requirements.