WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge on Friday sided with the Trump administration in allowing immigration agents to conduct enforcement operations at houses of worship for now, despite a lawsuit filed by religious groups over the new policy.
U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich in Washington refused to grant a preliminary injunction to the plaintiffs, more than two dozen Christian and Jewish groups representing millions of Americans.
She found that the plaintiffs lack standing, or the legal right to sue, since only a handful of immigration enforcement actions have been conducted in or around churches or other houses of worship and that the evidence at this point doesn’t show “that places of worship are being singled out as special targets.”
The plaintiffs are reviewing the decision and assessing their options, said their lead counsel, Kelsi Corkran.
“We remain gravely concerned about the impacts of this policy and are committed to protecting foundational rights enshrined in the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” said Corkran, the Supreme Court Director at the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy & Protection.
The religious groups argued the policy violated the right to practice their religion. Since President Donald Trump took office in January, attendance has declined significantly, with some areas showing double-digit percentage drops, they said.
The judge, though, found that the groups had not shown their drops were definitively linked to the church policy specifically, as opposed to broader increased actions by Immigration and Customs Enforcement or other agencies.
“That evidence suggests that congregants are staying home to avoid encountering ICE in their own neighborhoods, not because churches or synagogues are locations of elevated risk,” wrote Friedrich, who was appointed by the Republican president during his first term.
That means that simply reversing the policy on houses of worship wouldn’t necessarily mean immigrants would return to church, she found.
On Jan. 20, his first day back in office, Trump’s administration rescinded a Department of Homeland Security policy limiting where migrant arrests could happen. Its new policy said field agents using “common sense” and “discretion” can conduct immigration enforcement operations at houses of worship without a supervisor’s approval.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys claimed the new Homeland Security directive departs from the government’s 30-year-old policy against staging immigration enforcement operations in “protected areas” or “sensitive locations.”
The plaintiffs did offer a handful of examples of enforcement or surveillance, according to the judge's ruling. They cited reports of an immigrant arrested at one Georgia church and of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement search at a Georgia church day care center. The plaintiffs also cited four cases of immigration officers appearing to conduct surveillance near faith-based sites, such as photographing people in line for food.
The ruling comes as Trump’s immigration crackdown hits courtrooms around the country. On Thursday alone, another judge cleared the way for the administration to require people in the country illegally to register with the government even as the Supreme Court ordered the administration to work to bring back a man mistakenly deported to prison in El Salvador.
There have been at least two other lawsuits over that sensitive locations policy. One Maryland-based judge agreed to block immigration enforcement operations for some religious faiths, including Quakers.
A judge in Colorado, though, sided with the administration in another lawsuit over the reversal of the part of the policy that had limited immigration arrests at schools.
Despite the immediate setback, the plaintiffs can continue to press their case in the lawsuit.
President Donald Trump speaks during an event on energy production in the East Room of the White House, Tuesday, April 8, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
FILE - A sign that prohibits the entrance of ICE or Homeland Security is posted on a door at St. Paul and St. Andrew United Methodist Church in New York, Jan. 21, 2025. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig, File)
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump said he’s dropping — for now — his push to deploy National Guard troops in Chicago, Los Angeles and Portland, Oregon, a move that comes after legal roadblocks held up the effort.
“We will come back, perhaps in a much different and stronger form, when crime begins to soar again - Only a question of time!" he said in a social media post Wednesday.
Governors typically control states' National Guardsmen, and Trump had deployed troops to all three cities against the wishes of state and local Democratic leaders. He said it was necessary as part of a broader crackdown on immigration, crime and protests.
The president has made a crackdown on crime in cities a centerpiece of his second term — and has toyed with the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act to stop his opponents from using the courts to block his plans. He has said he sees his tough-on-crime approach as a winning political issue ahead of next year’s midterm elections.
Troops had already left Los Angeles after the president deployed them earlier this year as part of a broader crackdown on crime and immigration.
In his post, Trump said the troops' presence was responsible for a drop in crime in the three cities, though they were never on the streets in Chicago and Portland as legal challenges played out. When the Chicago deployment was challenged in court, a Justice Department lawyer said the Guard’s mission would be to protect federal properties and government agents in the field, not “solving all of crime in Chicago.”
Portland Mayor Keith Wilson’s office in a statement said the city’s reduction in crime was due to the efforts of local police and public safety programs. Chicago officials echoed the sentiment, saying in a release Tuesday that the city had 416 homicides in 2025 — the fewest since 2014.
Trump’s push to deploy the troops in Democrat-led cities has been met with legal challenges at nearly every turn.
The Supreme Court in December refused to allow the Trump administration to deploy National Guard troops in the Chicago area. The order was not a final ruling but was a significant and rare setback by the high court for the president’s efforts.
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker wrote on X Wednesday that Trump “lost in court when Illinois stood up against his attempt to militarize American cities with the National Guard. Now Trump is forced to stand down.”
Hundreds of troops from California and Oregon were deployed to Portland, but a federal judge barred them from going on the streets. A judge permanently blocked the deployment of National Guard troops there in November after a three-day trial.
Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek said in a statement Wednesday that her office had not yet received “official notification that the remaining federalized Oregon National Guard troops can return home. They were never lawfully deployed to Portland and there was no need for their presence. If President Trump has finally chosen to follow court orders and demobilize our troops, that’s a big win for Oregonians and for the rule of law.”
Trump's decision to federalize National Guard troops began in Los Angeles in June, when protesters took to the streets in response to a blitz of immigration arrests in the area. He deployed about 4,000 troops and 700 Marines to guard federal buildings and, later, to protest federal agents as they carried out immigration arrests.
The number of troops slowly dwindled until just several hundred were left. They were removed from the streets by Dec. 15 after a lower court ruling that also ordered control to be returned to Gov. Gavin Newsom. But an appeals court had paused the second part of the order, meaning control remained with Trump. In a Tuesday court filing, the Trump administration said it was no longer seeking a pause in that part of the order.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Wednesday ordered the Trump administration to return control of the National Guard to Newsom.
“About time (Trump) admitted defeat,” Newsom said in a social media post. “We’ve said it from day one: the federal takeover of California’s National Guard is illegal.”
Troops will remain on the ground in several other cities. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in December paused a lower court ruling that had called for an end to the deployment of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., where they’ve been deployed since August after Trump declared a “crime emergency.”
Trump also ordered the deployment of the Tennessee National Guard to Memphis in September as part of a larger federal task force to combat crime, a move supported by the state’s Republican Gov. Bill Lee and senators. A Tennessee judge blocked the use of the Guard, siding with Democratic state and local officials who sued. However, the judge stayed the decision to block the Guard as the state appeals, allowing the deployment to continue.
In New Orleans, about 350 National Guard troops deployed by Trump arrived in the city's historic French Quarter on Tuesday and are set to stay through Mardi Gras to help with safety. The state's Republican governor and the city's Democratic mayor support the deployment.
Ding reported from Los Angeles. Associated Press reporters John O'Connor in Springfield, Illinois, Becky Bohrer in Juneau, Alaska, Jack Brook in New Orleans and Adrian Sanz in Memphis contributed.
FILE - A protester confronts a line of U.S. National Guard members in the Metropolitan Detention Center of downtown Los Angeles, Sunday, June 8, 2025. (AP Photo/Eric Thayer, File)
FILE - Protesters stand off against California National Guard soldiers at the Federal Building in downtown Los Angeles, during a "No Kings" protest, June 14, 2025. (AP Photo/Richard Vogel, File)
President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Mar-a-Lago, Monday, Dec. 29, 2025, in Palm Beach, Fla. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
