WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court in Washington on Tuesday (October 20) revived an effort by religious organizations to challenge a Trump administration policy that allows more federal immigration enforcement activities in houses of worship, Bloomberg Law reported. The divided three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that a coalition of Christian and Jewish groups has grounds to sue over the enforcement policy change — the case is Mennonite Church USA v. DHS, No. 25-05209.

Judge Florence Pan, a Joe Biden appointee, wrote for the majority — joined by Judge Robert Wilkins, a Barack Obama appointee — that the organizations have shown their members face a “credible threat” of immigration enforcement near houses of worship as a result of the change, and she noted that enforcement operations have already begun at or near religious congregations as a “direct result” of it. The decision reverses a lower court judge's ruling that had denied the organizations' bid for relief as too speculative, and it resurrects their request to block U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from conducting arrests or other actions in or near their places of worship. The ruling does not itself ban enforcement at houses of worship; it sends the block request back to be heard.

The fight is over a January 2025 memo that rescinded Biden-era guidance restricting enforcement actions in “sensitive locations,” including churches, schools and hospitals. That earlier guidance told agents to avoid arrests in or near such places and to get headquarters approval first. The Trump administration instead told agents to use their “discretion along with a healthy dose of common sense,” rather than “bright line rules,” about where immigration actions may take place. The faith groups argued the threat of raids burdened their religious exercise and drove down attendance by congregants fearing immigration consequences, and said agents had since carried out enforcement actions, including surveillance, at or near churches and synagogues across the country.

The Justice Department had argued the groups needed specific information that an individual church was going to be raided in order to have grounds to sue. Judge Neomi Rao, a Donald Trump appointee, dissented on Tuesday, arguing the groups “offer only speculation” that restoring the old guidance would change the administration's broader enforcement practices. The majority said that view rests on the “mistaken belief” that the Biden-era memo is nonbinding: courts “generally assume that agencies comply with their announced administrative policies,” Pan wrote — otherwise the administration would have had no need to rescind it to pursue its more aggressive approach.

The Washington case is one of several over the same policy — and it matters directly to gurdwaras, because “houses of worship” in these cases covers all faiths. In a parallel Maryland case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in August upheld a lower-court order barring federal immigration operations at the plaintiff congregations — a coalition that included Sikh Temple Sacramento, Quaker meetings and Baptist churches, together more than 1,400 houses of worship — and a Massachusetts federal judge in February temporarily blocked ICE, absent urgent circumstances, at the houses of worship that sued there, a case still pending on appeal. Tuesday's decision comes amid heightened scrutiny of ICE tactics following the fatal shootings of two Americans in Minnesota during an enforcement surge, and a partial government shutdown earlier this year over congressional demands to rein in the agency.

Sources: Bloomberg Law (D.C. Circuit decision, October 20, 2026, Mennonite Church USA v. DHS, No. 25-05209); Government Executive and Catholic World Report / National Catholic Register (Fourth Circuit's August ruling in the Maryland case, whose plaintiffs included Sikh Temple Sacramento); Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse case record (district-court history).