Faith Groups Part of Five Legal Challenges to Actions by Trump Administration

The Banner has a subscription to republish articles from Religion News Service. This story by Jack Jenkins was published March 18, 2025 on religionnews.com. It has been edited for length and Banner style.

U.S. President Donald Trump faces at least five major lawsuits filed by religious groups during the first two months of his new administration, showing tensions between the White House and faith-based organizations challenging his agenda.

On March 17 a legal report filed in one of the cases—Catholic Charities, Diocese of Fort Worth, Inc. v. Department of Health and Human Service, et al.—showed the federal government has now paid the charity its requested $47,426,180.17 for refugee resettlement work. The funds until then had been frozen since the federal refugee program was halted in January.

The case is an example of faith-based pushback to President Trump’s actions that began almost immediately after he took office. There has been religious resistance, including in the courts, to several moves reshaping the federal government and dramatically altering immigration policy.

According to The Dallas Morning News, the millions paid to Fort Worth’s Catholic Charities agency, which has overseen Texas’ refugee resettlement services since Gov. Greg Abbott pulled the state from the federal program in 2016, was part of a suit filed in early March against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which supplies some funds related to refugee resettlement.

In the lawsuit, Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Fort Worth demanded it be paid millions in withheld funds it typically distributes to various partner organizations in the state, alleging the funding freeze was unlawful and led to widespread layoffs.

The March 17 Texas result follows another legal victory for faith groups involved in a similar case, Pacito v. Trump, filed by national faith-based refugee resettlement agencies Church World Service and HIAS, alongside Lutheran Community Services Northwest and individual refugees and their families, against the Trump administration for suspending the refugee program. In late February, U.S. District Judge Jamal Whitehead, the federal judge overseeing the case in Seattle, blocked the president’s executive order halting the suspension of the refugee program.

However, the day after the ruling, the government sent out “termination orders” regarding federal contracts, also known as cooperative agreements, to all 10 refugee resettlement groups working with the government. The administration then argued in court that the organizations, seven of which are faith-based, no longer had standing to sue. The move resulted in a tense court hearing March 4, in which Whitehead questioned the timing of the termination orders.

Resettlement groups also argued they had yet to see evidence of the refugee program restarting to comply with the judge’s order, prompting Whitehead to order the government to produce a status report released last week. In it, federal authorities acknowledged a “significant deterioration of functions” of the refugee program.

In that same March 4 hearing, lawyers for the government suggested the abrupt contract cancellations were part of ongoing litigation in another case, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops v. U.S. Department of State, filed in Washington, D.C. Unlike Pacito v. Trump, the suit filed by the USCCB—which also partners with the federal government to resettle refugees—was narrower in scope: The bishops focused primarily on the government’s contracts with the USCCB in the U.S., alleging the government had violated the Administrative Procedure Act.

The USCCB’s request for a preliminary injunction was denied by a judge in early March, who argued the case should be resolved by the Court of Federal Claims. In response, the USCCB asked the D.C. Circuit appeals court to issue an emergency injunction—the only feasible way to recoup the withheld funds within a relevant timeline. The USCCB, like other resettlement agencies, offers refugees 90 days of assistance upon arrival into the U.S., but the Trump administration froze the program on Jan. 24, meaning the bishops have until April 23 to offer refugees still under their care any funds traditionally provided by the government.

The D.C. Circuit is expected to respond by March 28.

“The USCCB continues to advocate for refugees, and we are doing what we can to ensure that the newly arrived refugees and their families, who were assigned to our care by the State Department, are not deprived of assistance promised to them by the United States,” Chieko Noguchi, a USCCB spokesperson, told RNS in a statement.

Meanwhile, the federal government is also named in two lawsuits centered on the Trump administration’s decision to rescind a 2011 government rule that discouraged immigration raids at “sensitive locations,” such as houses of worship.

Although the two cases differ slightly, they both allege the government’s actions violated both their right to free association and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, arguing rescinding the rule reduced worship attendance and the use of services provided by the religious communities. The federal policy change has already resulted in at least one immigration arrest at a church and diminished worship attendance among immigrants, including those with legal status and U.S. citizens, RNS previously reported.

The first of the lawsuits, Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, was initially filed on Jan. 27 by a slate of Quaker groups and later joined by the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship and a Sikh temple in Sacramento, Calif. They already won a narrow legal victory: In late February, the plaintiffs received a preliminary injunction restricting immigration raids at their houses of worship as the case proceeds, although it applies only to the groups involved with the case.

The second lawsuit, filed Feb. 11, had a more expansive list of plaintiffs, with 27 religious groups, including entire denominations such as the Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church (USA), the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, the Union for Reform Judaism and the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, signing on. Those religious groups have also requested a preliminary injunction, but the case is ongoing.

Other lawsuits against President Trump’s administration that include faith-based groups as Plaintiffs include a suit focused on the administration’s halt in global aid funding and a suit regarding the freezing of Inflation Reduction Act grant funds.

c. 2025 Religion News Service