Immigration resources for Parishes and Schools

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frequently Asked Questions for Parishes re: Immigration Enforcement

January 29, 2025

 

How should a parish respond if ICE or other immigration officials come to a parish?

1119 K Street, 2nd Floor | Sacramento, California  95814 | T: (916) 313-4000 | F: (916) 313-4066

www.CAcatholic.org

 

January 29, 2025 

 

 

 

 

 

A Note on Immigration Executive Orders and our Schools 

 

Several questions continue to be raised about the president’s Executive Orders regarding immigration and schools.

 

It is essential to understand the impact of these measures on the most vulnerable in our communities—those fleeing violence, seeking safety, or striving to build a better future for their families. Our mandate from Christ is rooted in our call to welcome the stranger and uphold the dignity of every person. This is what the Church has done and will continue to do. 

 

Since our Catholic parishes and schools do not collect immigration status, we do not have that information to provide should ICE or any other immigration agents ask. Our schools strictly follow all Safe Environment protocols, which prohibit unauthorized visitors from gaining access to school grounds. 

 

For more detailed information and resources, please contact your (arch)diocese or visit www.cacatholic.org/immigration. 

____________________________________________

 

Notice to Parishioners 

 

Given the White House’s recent orders regarding immigration enforcement, questions have been raised about the safety of our churches. Since Jesus commanded his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all peoples, Catholic churches have opened their doors to anyone wishing to worship or request services from church members and staff. We welcome all people. We do not inquire about immigration status or ask for immigration documents. We strive to welcome the stranger and uphold the dignity of every person. We ask that every person who enters the doors of our church do so with a sense of reverence for the House of the Lord and hospitality to each of His children. Our doors will remain open for all people seeking to worship, seeking spiritual solace, or asking for pastoral services.

 

For more detailed information and resources, please contact your (arch)diocese or visit www.cacatholic.org/immigration.

 

1119 K Street, 2nd Floor | Sacramento, California  95814 | T: (916) 313-4000 | F: (916) 313-4066

www.CAcatholic.org

United States
Conference of
Catholic Bishops
Department of
Migration and
Refugee Services
Office of
Policy and Advocacy
usccb.org/migrationpolicy
JANUARY 24, 2025
Initial Migration-Related Executive Actions of
the Second Trump Administration
On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump announced a series of executive actions on a wide
range of topics. Several of these directly address, or otherwise implicate, the issue of migration. In
addition to these executive actions, the new administration has announced several other migration-
related policy changes, also discussed below.
Action 1: “Realigning the United States Refugee Admissions Program”
This executive order establishes the policy of the United States “to admit only those refugees who
can fully and appropriately assimilate into the United States and to ensure that the United States
preserves taxpayer resources for its citizens.” It conveys the belief that the further resettlement of
refugees in the United States through the Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) would be
detrimental to the interests of the United States. Consistent with that finding, this order indefinitely
suspends the admission of refugees through USRAP, beginning January 27, 2025. It does provide for
exceptions to be made jointly by the Secretary of Homeland Security and Secretary of State on a
case-by-case basis.
Within 90 days of this order (by April 20, 2025), the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation
with the Secretary of State, is required to submit a report to the President regarding whether
resumption of refugee resettlement would be in the interests of the United States, also doing so every
90 days thereafter until which point the President affirmatively decides to resume resettlement
through USRAP. It further requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the
Attorney General, to determine the extent to which state and local jurisdictions may have greater
involvement in the process of determining the resettlement of refugees in their jurisdictions and to
devise a proposal to lawfully promote such involvement. This order also explicitly revokes Executive
Order 14013 on “Rebuilding and Enhancing Programs to Resettle Refugees and Planning for the
Impact of Climate Change on Migration” from February 4, 2021.
Action 2: “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other
National Security and Public Safety Threats”
This executive order provides for the enhanced vetting and screening across agencies of noncitizens
prior to their admission to the United States and also of those already in the United States. Consistent
with this, the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Attorney General, Secretary of Homeland
Security, and Director of National Intelligence, are ordered to:
• Identify all resources that may be used to ensure that all noncitizens seeking admission to the
United States, or who are already in the United States, are vetted and screened to the
maximum degree possible;
• Determine the information needed from any country to adjudicate any visa, admission, or
other immigration benefit for one of its nationals and to ascertain whether the individual
seeking the benefit is who the individual claims to be and that the individual is not a security
or public-safety threat;
• Re-establish a uniform baseline for screening and vetting standards and procedures,
consistent with the uniform baseline that existed on January 19, 2021, that will be used for
any noncitizen seeking any immigration benefit;
• Vet and screen to the maximum degree possible all aliens who intend to be admitted, enter,
or are already inside the United States, particularly those noncitizens “coming from regions
or nations with identified security risks”; and
• Within 60 days of the date of this order (by March 21, 2025), submit to the President a report
that identifies countries throughout the world for which “vetting and screening information
is so deficient as to warrant a partial or full suspension on the admission of nationals from
those countries”
, how many nationals from those countries have entered or have been
admitted into the United States on or since January 20, 2021, and any other information they
“deem relevant to the actions or activities of such nationals since their admission or entry to
the United States”
.
Whenever the country-specific information required for the report is identified, supporting the
exclusion or removal of a noncitizen from such a country, the Secretary of Homeland Security is
ordered to take immediate steps to exclude or remove that noncitizen unless the Secretary determines
that doing so would “inhibit a significant pending investigation or prosecution of the alien for a
serious criminal offense or would be contrary to the national security interests of the United States.”
Additional measures required to be put in place within 30 days (by February 19, 2025) of this order
by the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Attorney General, Secretary of Homeland Security,
and Director of National Intelligence, include:
• Evaluating and adjusting all existing regulations, policies, procedures, and provisions of the
Foreign Service Manual, or guidance of any kind pertaining to each of the criminal and
security grounds of inadmissibility at 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)–(3);
• Ensuring sufficient safeguards are in place to prevent any refugee or stateless individual from
being admitted to the United States without undergoing stringent identification verification
beyond that required of any other alien seeking admission or entry to the United States;
• Evaluating all visa programs to ensure that they “are not used by foreign nation-states or other
hostile actors to harm the security, economic, political, cultural, or other national interests of
the United States”;
• Recommending any actions necessary to “protect the American people from the actions of
foreign nationals who have undermined or seek to undermine the fundamental constitutional
rights of the American people, including, but not limited to, our Citizens’ rights to freedom
of speech and the free exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment, who preach or
call for sectarian violence, the overthrow or replacement of the culture on which our
constitutional Republic stands, or who provide aid, advocacy, or support for foreign
terrorists”;
Initial Migration-Related Executive Actions of the Second Trump Administration Page 2
• Ensuring the devotion of adequate resources to identify and take appropriate action for
offenses described in 8 U.S.C. 1451 (revoking a person’s naturalization);
• Evaluating the adequacy of programs designed to ensure the proper assimilation of lawful
immigrants into the United States and recommending any additional measures to be taken
that promote a “unified American identity and attachment to the Constitution, laws, and
founding principles of the United States”; and
• Recommending any additional actions to protect the American people and our constitutional
republic from foreign threats.
Action 3: “Declaring a National Emergency at the Southern Border of the
United States”
This proclamation declares that a “national emergency exists at the southern border of the United
States” and, citing the U.S. Constitution and statutory provisions (including the National
Emergencies Act), authorizes the deployment of the Armed Forces to the area. Through this
proclamation, the President directs the Secretary of Defense to “order as many units or members of
the Armed Forces, including the Ready Reserve and the National Guard, as the Secretary of Defense
determines to be appropriate to support the activities of the Secretary of Homeland Security in
obtaining complete operational control of the southern border of the United States.” This
proclamation further requires the Secretary of Defense to take “all appropriate action” to assist the
Secretary of Homeland Security in the provision of detention space, transportation (including
aircraft), and other logistics in support of civil law enforcement operations. Along with this, the
Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, are
required to “take all appropriate action, consistent with law, to prioritize the impedance and denial of
the unauthorized physical entry of aliens across the southern border of the United States, and to
ensure that use of force policies prioritize the safety and security of Department of Homeland
Security personnel and of members of the Armed Forces.”
The Secretary of Transportation and the Federal Communications Commission are also ordered under
this proclamation to consider waiving all regulations or policies that restrict the Department of
Homeland Security’s “ability to counter unmanned aerial systems within 5 miles of the southern
border.
” Moreover, this proclamation explicitly revokes Proclamation 10142 on “Termination of
Emergency with Respect to the Southern Border of the United States and Redirection of Funds
Diverted to Border Wall Construction” (January 20, 2021). Finally, within 90 days of the
proclamation (by April 20, 2025), the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security are required to
submit a joint report to the President about the conditions at the border and “any recommendations
regarding additional actions that may be necessary to obtain complete operational control of the
southern border, including whether to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807.”
Action 4: “Securing Our Borders”
In this executive order, the President calls for measures to deter and prevent noncitizens from entering
the United States. In particular, the following measures are mentioned in this order with respect to
securing the nation’s borders: the establishment of a wall and other physical barriers, monitored by
personnel and technology; detaining noncitizens apprehended on suspicion of violating state or
federal law for the maximum duration permitted by law until they are removed from the United
Initial Migration-Related Executive Actions of the Second Trump Administration Page 3
States; removing all noncitizens who have entered or remain in the United States in violation of
federal law; pursuing criminal charges against noncitizens in violation of immigration laws and
against those who facilitate their presence in the United States; cooperation with state and local law
enforcement in enacting federal-state partnerships to enforce federal immigration priorities; and
obtaining operational control of the nation’s borders.
Accordingly, this order directs the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Homeland Security, and/or the
Attorney General to undertake the following:
• Deploy and construct temporary and permanent physical barriers;
• Deploy, and reassign as necessary, sufficient personnel along the southern border of the
United States to ensure complete operational control;
• Detain, to the fullest extent permitted by law, aliens apprehended for violations of
immigration law until their successful removal from the United States, including by ending
the policy colloquially known as “catch-and-release”;
• Resume the Migrant Protection Protocols (also known as “Remain in Mexico”);
• Adjust parole policies by terminating the use of the “CBP One” mobile application as a
method of paroling or facilitating the entry of noncitizens, terminating all categorical parole
programs “that are contrary to the policies of the United States”, specifically including the
Processes for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans (CHNV), and ensure that all
future parole determinations comply with this order;
• Facilitate additional international cooperations and agreements, consistent with the policies
of this order, including what are often referred to as “Safe Third Country” agreements;
• Fulfill the requirements of the DNA Fingerprint Act of 2005—which authorizes the Attorney
General to promulgate regulations for federal law enforcement agencies to collect DNA
samples from detained noncitizens, excluding lawful permanent residents1
—and take “any
available technologies and procedures to determine the validity of any claimed familial
relationship” between noncitizens;
• Prioritize the prosecution of offenses that relate to the borders of the United States, including
the investigation and prosecution of offenses that involve human smuggling, human
trafficking, child trafficking, and sex trafficking in the United States; and
• Provide recommendations to the President regarding the use of any other authority.
Action 5: “Guaranteeing the States Protection Against Invasion”
Through this proclamation, the Secretary of Homeland Security is ordered to immediately deny
admission to all noncitizens deemed to be engaged in the “invasion across the southern border,
” with
the President citing the “Federal Government’s promise in Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S.
Constitution, to ‘protect each of [the States] against Invasion’
,
” as well as 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and
1185(a) as authorities for this. Said suspension is ordered until the President finds that the purported
“invasion” has ceased. This proclamation additionally restricts entry for any noncitizen who does not
provide federal officials with “sufficient medical information and reliable criminal history and
1 34 U.S.C. § 40702.
Initial Migration-Related Executive Actions of the Second Trump Administration Page 4
background information.” In neither case are exceptions or exemptions made for any class of
individuals, including unaccompanied children or victims of a severe form of human trafficking, and
this proclamation explicitly prevents, in both cases, noncitizens from “invoking provisions of the
[Immigration and Nationality Act] that would permit their continued presence in the United States,
including, but not limited to, [asylum]”. Finally, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination
with the Secretary of State and Attorney General, are ordered to take all appropriate action to repel,
repatriate, or remove any alien engaged in the purported “invasion”.
Action 6: “Designating Cartels and Other Organizations as Foreign
Terrorist Organizations and Specially Designated Global Terrorists”
This executive order creates a process by which certain international cartels and other organizations
will be designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) or Specially Designated Global
Terrorists (SDGT), citing multiple authorities in federal law. Within 14 days of this order (by
February 3, 2025), the Secretary of State (in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the
Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence) is
required to make a recommendation regarding the designation of any cartel or other organization as
an FTO and/or SDGT.
Also within 14 days of this order, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, in
consultation with the Secretary of State, are required to prepare for “any decision” the President
makes to invoke the Alien Enemies Act, in relation to the existence of “any qualifying invasion or
predatory incursion against the territory of the United States by a qualifying actor, and to prepare
such facilities as necessary to expedite the removal of those who may be designated under this order.
”
The Alien Enemies Act provides authority for the removal of all “natives, citizens, denizens, or
subjects of [a] hostile nation or government” who are at least fourteen years old and not U.S. citizens
whenever there is “a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government,
or any invasion or predatory incursion shall be perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the
territory of the United States, by any foreign nation or government”.2
Action 7: “Clarifying the Military’s Role in Protecting the Territorial
Integrity of the United States”
Consistent with the national emergency declared in Action 3 above, this executive order directs the
Secretary of Defense to deliver, within 10 days of this order (by January 30, 2025) “a revision to the
Unified Command Plan that assigns United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) the
mission to seal the borders and maintain the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security of the
United States by repelling forms of invasion including unlawful mass migration, narcotics
trafficking, human smuggling and trafficking, and other criminal activities.” Effective immediately,
this order also adds several requirements to the Contingency Planning Guidance and Guidance for
the Employment of the Force, including:
• A Level 3 planning requirement for USNORTHCOM to seal the borders and maintain the
sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security of the United States by repelling forms of
invasion, with a commander’s estimate due to the Secretary of Defense within 30 days;
2 50 U.S.C. 21 et seq.
Initial Migration-Related Executive Actions of the Second Trump Administration Page 5
• A campaign planning requirement for USNORTHCOM to provide steady-state southern
border security, seal the border, and maintain the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security
of the United States by repelling forms of invasion; and
• Continuous assessments of all available options to protect the sovereign territory of the United
States from mass unlawful entry and impingement on our national sovereignty and security
by foreign nations and transnational criminal organizations.
Action 8: “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship”
This executive order asserts that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause (“All persons born
or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United
States and of the State wherein they reside”) was not intended to apply to a person born in the United
States when:
(1) The person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a U.S.
citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth; or
(2) The person’s mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was
lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the United States under the auspices
of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was
not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.
This order further conveys that it is the policy of the United States that “no department or agency of
the United States government shall issue documents recognizing United States citizenship, or accept
documents issued by State, local, or other governments or authorities purporting to recognize United
States citizenship, to persons” who fall into one of the two categories above. This order’s
interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment and related policy is applied to those born within the
United States beginning 30 days from the date of this order (February 19, 2025). With respect to
enforcement, this order directs the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of
Homeland Security, and the Commissioner of Social Security to take all appropriate measures to
ensure that the regulations and policies of their respective departments and agencies are consistent
with the substance of this order and that their personnel act in accordance with it. Additionally, the
heads of all executive departments and agencies are required by this order to issue public guidance
within 30 days from the date of this order regarding implementation with respect to their operations
and activities.
Several legal challenges have already been brought against this executive order,
3 and, on January 23,
2025, a judge in one such case issued a temporary restraining order, temporarily blocking this order
from going into effect for an initial period of 14 days.4
3 Nate Raymond, 22 Democratic-led States Sue Over Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order, REUTERS (Jan. 22, 2025),
https://www.reuters.com/legal/lawsuits-challenge-trumps-birthright-citizenship-other-orders-2025-01-21/.
4 Daniel Barnes, Federal District Court Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order, NBC News
(Jan. 23, 2025), https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/trump-administration-defends-birthright-citizenship-
order-court-first-rcna188851; Washington et al v. Trump et al, No. C25-0127-JCC (D. Wash. Jan. 23, 2025).
Initial Migration-Related Executive Actions of the Second Trump Administration Page 6
Action 9: “Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid”
This executive order makes several assertions about the “United States foreign aid industry and
bureaucracy” and implements an immediate, 90-day pause (ending April 20, 2025) in U.S. foreign
development assistance. The pause applies to “new obligations and disbursements of development
assistance funds to foreign countries and implementing non-governmental organizations,
international organizations, and contractors”, enforceable by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). This order also requires that reviews be conducted of each foreign assistance program by the
responsible department and agency heads under guidelines provided by the Secretary of State, in
consultation with the Director of OMB.
Determinations about whether to continue, modify, or cease each foreign assistance program must be
made within 90 days of this order, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State. New obligations
and disbursements of foreign development assistance funds may resume for a program (in the same
or a modified form) prior to the end of the 90-day period, so long as a review has been conducted
and the Secretary of State or his designee so decides, in consultation with the Director of OMB. Any
other new foreign assistance programs and obligations must be approved by the Secretary of State or
his designee, in consultation with the Director of OMB. Finally, this order authorizes the Secretary
of State to waive the 90-day pause for specific programs.
Action 10: “America First Policy Directive to the Secretary of State”
This executive order states: “From this day forward, the foreign policy of the United States shall
champion core American interests and always put America and American citizens first.” This order
directs the Secretary of State, as soon as practicable, to issue guidance bringing all activities of the
Department of State in line with this policy.
Action 11: “Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions”
In addition to the substantive executive actions described above, President Trump signed an executive
order rescinding over 70 executive actions issued during the Biden Administration, including the
following related to migration:
• Executive Order 13993 on “Revision of Civil Immigration Enforcement Policies and
Priorities” (January 20, 2021)
• Executive Order 14010 on “Creating a Comprehensive Regional Framework to Address the
Causes of Migration, to Manage Migration Throughout North and Central America, and to
Provide Safe and Orderly Processing of Asylum Seekers at the United States Border”
(February 2, 2021)
• Executive Order 14011 on “Establishment of Interagency Task Force on the Reunification of
Families” (February 2, 2021)
• Executive Order 14012 on “Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration Systems and
Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans” (February 2, 2021)
• Executive Order 14013 on “Rebuilding and Enhancing Programs to Resettle Refugees and
Planning for the Impact of Climate Change on Migration” (February 4, 2021)
Initial Migration-Related Executive Actions of the Second Trump Administration Page 7
Other Noteworthy Migration-Related Actions Taken
Since January 20, 2025, the Trump Administration has also announced the following migration-
related actions:
• U.S. Customs and Border Protection removed the scheduling functionality in the CBP One
mobile application for noncitizens, including asylum seekers in Mexico, cancelling all
previously scheduled appointments (January 20, 2025)
• U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) revoked the “Guidelines for Enforcement
Actions in or Near Protected Areas” (formerly known as the “sensitive locations” policy)
(January 20, 2025)
• DHS reinstated the Migrant Protection Protocols (also known as “Remain in Mexico)
(January 21, 2025)
• DHS issued new guidance expanding the use of expedited removal to the maximum extent
allowed by statute (January 21, 2025)
• DHS published new guidance regarding how to exercise discretion in immigration
enforcement (January 23, 2025)
• DHS issued new guidance on identifying those granted parole under a policy that may be
paused, modified, or terminated as of January 20, 2025, for possible enforcement action
(January 24, 2025)
USCCB Response
To date, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has issued the following statements addressing
these actions:
• USCCB Statement on the Executive Orders Expected to be Signed by the New President
(January 20, 2025)
• Statement of Archbishop Broglio on Executive Orders Signed by the President (January 22,
2025)
• Executive Actions Will Subject Vulnerable Families and Children to Grave Danger, says
Bishop Seitz (January 22, 2025)
• “Human Dignity is Not Dependent on a Person’s Citizenship or Immigration Status” (January
23, 2025)
Initial Migration-Related Executive Actions of the Second Trump Administration Page 8

Factsheet: Trump’s Rescission of Protected Areas Policies
Undermines Safety for All
On January 20, 2025, the Trump Administration rescinded a Biden-era policy that protected certain
areas—such as churches, school, and hospitals—from immigration enforcement, replacing it with an
unreleased directive that gives ICE agents unbridled power to take enforcement actions in any of these
spaces using so-called “common sense.
” Protecting sensitive locations from immigration enforcement is
essential to ensuring all our community members can access basic services and support without fear—the
policy’s rescission constitutes an attack on immigrant communities’ wellbeing and undermines safety for
all. In the wake of a litany of cruel executive orders targeting immigrants—and sanctuary policies—the
rescission is especially pernicious in its attempt to make immigrants feel unsafe even in spaces that are
the core of a civil society.
This factsheet describes what the protected areas policy was, what laws apply to those areas now, and
what steps advocates and communities can take to support immigrants in continuing to access critical
community spaces and services. For more Know Your Rights information, please see NILC’s general KYR
guidance and check back for area- and issue-specific updates.
What are Protected Areas Policies?
Since 2011, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has maintained standing guidance requiring
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to refrain from immigration enforcement actions in certain
areas (previously known as “Sensitive Locations”). In 2021, the Biden administration issued a new memo
expanding the definitions of these areas, which included schools (including preschools, K-12 schools,
and higher education institutions); healthcare facilities (including hospitals, doctor’s offices, and
community health clinics); places of worship; places where children gather (including playgrounds
and bus stops); social services establishments (such as domestic violence shelters and food pantries);
disaster/emergency response sites (including evacuation routes); weddings, funerals, and religious
ceremonies; and parades, demonstrations, and rallies. The memo also specified that officers should
refrain from enforcement actions “near” these protected areas, including surrounding areas like
sidewalks, entrances, and parking lots. Lastly, the Biden administration issued a separate memorandum
limiting the circumstances in which immigration enforcement actions could take place in courthouses.
The Trump Administration has not clarified if all three memos were rescinded—or if it will issue a new
one—though it has stated explicitly that ICE could take enforcement action in schools and churches.
What does rescission of the Protected Areas memos mean for immigrant communities and public
health and safety?
The rescission is a fear tactic by the Trump administration to make immigrant communities feel less safe
even in spaces that are at the heart of a civil society. These are areas and institutions that individuals,
families, and children rely on for basic services and survival needs. The rescission will have a chilling
effect on immigrant communities now afraid to access medical care, education, childcare, and places of
worship for fear that they or a loved one will be ripped away from the community. Protected areas are
also unique in that overall public health and safety suffer if any particular community is precluded or
afraid to access them. Public health suffers on a large scale, for example, when any one community
becomes unable or afraid to access vaccination sites or clinics to receive care for contagious diseases.
1
What legal protections remain in place after rescission of the memos?
All people in the United States have certain rights regardless of immigration status. However, now that
the protected areas (aka “sensitive locations”) and courthouse memos have been rescinded, these areas
no longer enjoy special protections from ICE enforcement. Instead, individuals will need to rely on basic
constitutional protections in these spaces. Specifically, the Fourth Amendment protects all individuals
from unreasonable searches and seizures, and the Fifth Amendment ensures the right to remain silent
when confronted by law enforcement. Certain states and localities have enacted laws and policies that
limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, though they do not prevent ICE from taking
enforcement actions in these areas.
Note an important caveat to the above protections: within 100 miles of a land or sea border—where two
thirds of the US population reside—Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) has special legal authority to board
buses, trains, and boats in order to search for individuals without lawful status. Although individuals in
these zones retain the right to remain silent, their Fourth Amendment rights are reduced by the federal
laws that allow CBP to conduct these searches.1
Will ICE still need a warrant to enter areas that were previously protected?
Yes, but only for places within those areas that are considered private, since the Fourth Amendment
protects areas where people have a “reasonable expectation of privacy.” In the context of protected
areas, areas open to the public such as lobbies, waiting areas and parking lots are considered public,
while interior areas and those marked “private” with a sign are considered private. For immigration
enforcement to search or enter a private area within a formerly protected area, the Fourth Amendment
requires a valid judicial warrant signed by a federal judge unless staff at those areas consent to the
search.
2 Note that the same caveats as above apply to formerly protected areas within 100 miles of the
border.
Can ICE arrest individuals inside protected areas?
Yes, under some circumstances. If ICE agents enter a formerly protected area—either a public area or by
gaining access to a private area through a warrant or consent—they can arrest people if they have a valid
administrative warrant for that person or if they have probable cause to believe that the person is
“removable” from the United States—i.e. the person does not have current lawful status or that they have
engaged in conduct such as involvement in the criminal legal system that gives ICE the authority to
begin deportation proceedings against them. Probable cause can be established through questioning of
individuals who disclose their immigration status or documentation that indicates they are noncitizens—
which is why it is so important to remain silent! Running from ICE agents can also establish probable
cause.
How can staff members at formerly protected areas prepare for potential ICE actions?
Staff at formerly protected areas should be aware of their rights not to cooperate with ICE. NILC’s multi-
lingual guide for employers has additional information. For individuals impacted by the rescission,
please see NILC’s KYR guidance and other community-facing materials.
1 This resource on 100 Mile Border Zones provides more information and scenarios.
2 Please review NILC’s resource on warrants & subpoenas for more information.
2
What actions can communities take to support and protect immigrants in formerly protected
areas?
Staff and administrators at formerly protected areas should be aware of key rights and best practices that
apply to all these spaces, as well as location-specific ones.3
IMPORTANT STEPS FOR ALL FORMERLY PROTECTED AREAS:
➢ Develop a written response policy & preparedness plans in advance.
➢ Designate an authorized person to review warrants & subpoenas.
➢ Understand the distinctions between public and private areas.
➢ Train non-authorized staff & volunteers on how to respond to ICE requests.
➢ Document all interactions with immigration enforcement.
➢ Connect with immigration response networks in your area.
Recommendations for school administrators and staff:
• Identify any applicable federal, state, and local laws and policies that protect
immigrant students and ensure staff are trained on them. For example, teacher and
administrator associations, school districts, and other educational institutions and
organizations can host trainings on the laws and policies that protect students’ data, such as
the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).
• Re-evaluate data collection practices. Schools should think through and limit to the
extent possible the information that is collected from students and their families, for what
purpose, under what protections, and who has access. Avoid collecting information about
immigration status, which has a deep chilling effect for families and possibly violates Plyler
v. Doe, the Supreme Court decision guaranteeing access to K-12 public education for all
children regardless of immigration status. See NILC’s resource on Plyler & Data Collection
for more information.
• Share “Know Your Rights" information widely. For example, promote the creation of
Family Emergency Plans.
• Create or update School Resolutions. Such resolutions can play an important role in
creating a safe environment of trust. Resolutions can affirm your school’s commitment to
support immigrant families, list what services and supports will be provided (e.g., legal
services) in case of an immigration enforcement action, and describe what policies and
protocols are in place to protect them. Such resolutions can also explicitly share with the
community the school’s preparedness plan if immigration law enforcement shows up at or
near a school.
4
3 The California Attorney General’s Office has created model guidelines for nearly all formerly protected areas.
4 The Century Foundation has additional proposals for protective actions school districts can take.
3
Recommendations for hospitals and health centers:
NILC’s resource for health care providers includes additional details on protecting the rights of health
care facilities, staff, and patients. Recommendations include:
• Minimize disclosure of patient information. While immigration status or evidence of foreign
birth are not, by themselves, considered personal health information (PHI) protected
under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), health care
providers have no affirmative legal obligation to inquire into or report to federal immigration
authorities about a patient’s immigration status.
• Reevaluate data collection policies. Avoid asking for patients’ immigration status and, if you
must collect such information for a purpose such as Medicaid enrollment, avoid including that
information in the patient’s medical and billing records.5
• Scrutinize scope of the warrant. In the healthcare context, special scrutiny should be given to
the scope of the warrants to ensure that officials do not search other areas (for example, a
warrant that covers an emergency room would not authorize ICE to enter other areas of a
hospital).
• Educate and reassure patients. Healthcare facilities should endeavor to provide know your
rights information such as posters, brochures, and KYR cards so that patients are aware of their
rights and confidentiality laws.
Recommendations for social services organizations:
Social services organizations should implement policies and procedures similar to those outlined above
for all employers.6
• Identify applicable confidentiality and privacy laws. Depending on the type of services
provided, social services organizations may be able to invoke additional protections for those who
seek their services, such as HIPAA (health-related social services), FERPA (education-related
services), or attorney-client privilege (legal services).
• Minimize public areas where service seekers gather. Although this will depend on the physical
space, consider rearranging waiting areas and other potentially public spaces to be behind closed
doors rather than in open entry areas. Also clearly mark spaces as “private.”
• Train staff on harboring laws. Particularly for social services organizations whose mission
involves serving immigrant communities, staff should be aware of harboring laws and how to
protect themselves and their organization from liability.7
• Obtain legal counsel to advise on subpoenas and ensure 501(c)(3) compliance. Given the
troubling pattern of nonprofits serving immigrant communities coming under greater scrutiny,
social services organizations should have legal counsel available to respond to subpoena requests,
5 Two states—Texas and Florida—are currently requiring hospitals to ask patients about their immigration status and
to report the aggregate amount of uncompensated care provided to undocumented patients. However, providers’
legal obligations to provide care is not affected by a patient’s decision not to provide their status.
6 In addition to specific considerations below, this resource provides information specifically for non-profit
organizations.
7 This CLINIC resource provides additional information on harboring laws.
4
and if they have 501(c)(3) status, to ensure the organization is fully in compliance.
Recommendations for places of worship:
• Identify non-public spaces. ICE agents may enter public spaces that are open to congregants
but cannot enter private areas such as offices and parsonages. Places of worship should clearly
delineate what areas are private and/or if areas are only open to the public at certain times.
• Understand the laws that impact sanctuary congregations. Congregations that choose to
designate themselves as “sanctuaries” should be aware of potential legal implications, including
criminal law against “harboring” of undocumented immigrants,
8 and potential legal protections
under the Religious Freedom Reform Act (RFRA).
9
Recommendations for Courthouses:
• Be aware of existing—or advocate for—state level protection from ICE enforcement in
courthouses. For example, the Oregon Supreme Court has issued a standing order requiring a
warrant for ICE to arrest individuals in or around courthouses, including entrances, sidewalks,
and parking lots. Other states like New York and California have legislation that similarly
protects courthouses.10
• Familiarize yourself with other Constitutional protections: Multiple constitutional rights
apply to individuals regardless of status protect the right to attend court proceedings, including
the First Amendment (right to petition); Fifth Amendment (right to due process); and Sixth
Amendment (right to confront witnesses).
Is it possible that protected areas will come back into effect?
Yes. Community members and advocates should stay alert for updates regarding legal or legislative
changes and continue to advocate for policies—especially at the state and local level—that allow
immigrant communities not only to be safe, but to thrive.
• Legal Action: There may be legal challenges to Trump’s rescission, which could result in a court
blocking the administration’s action. Such injunctions may be nationwide and cover all
protected areas or be limited to certain states or regions and/or to certain types of protected
areas. These legal developments can change quickly as the cases move through the courts so it
will be important to check NILC’s website and other trusted sources regularly for updates.
• Federal Legislative Advocacy: U.S. Representative Adriano Espaillat and Senator Richard
Blumenthal have led legislation entitled the Protecting Sensitive Locations Act that would codify
the majority of the protected areas memos’ protections. NILC and partners will continue to
support this bill’s advancement.
• Future Executive Action: Just as the Trump Administration rescinded the Biden
administration’s memos, a future administration could revive or even bolster these protections.
This resource was prepared by Lynn Damiano Pearson, NILC Attorney (last updated January 21, 2025).
8 This ACLU resource addresses harboring in and sanctuary congregations.
9 This article discusses potential RFRA protections for sanctuary churches.
10 For example, see New York’s ICE Out of Courts Campaign.
5