At St. John’s Cathedral in Los Angeles, the Rev. Melvin Soriano is locking the gates, among other precautions, to prepare if ICE were to come to the church to detain someone.
Soriano said the church has had some suspicious incidents where people were taking pictures of congregants inside the sanctuary.
“We posted everywhere that this is private property, implying that you cannot just merely come here, that you will need a warrant if you come here not as worshippers,” Soriano said. “We have also changed the way we do things so that we don’t draw the attention of ICE.”
This comes after a January 21 directive from Acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Benjamine Huffman allowing immigration enforcement in “sensitive” areas such as churches and schools.
Soriano wondered if the suspicious incidents were a mere coincidence he only noticed because of heightened awareness.
“We are noticing that there are unusual activities of people visiting us who have never visited us and taking notes and taking pictures,” Soriano said.
He said that it was odd because people were taking pictures during the service itself.
“Everyone notices this now, and obviously it affects us in our way of doing worship because it creates anxiety when we should be in a place where we are worshipping,” Soriano said.
Local churches are responding with concern and added precautions over the possibility that federal immigration enforcement could come to their doorstep.
“We’ve educated ourselves on the laws as best we can, we’re aware of those laws, we take them seriously,” said the Rev. Matt Keadle of St. Mark’s Lutheran Church. “But it’s also our intent to treat people as children of God regardless of their immigration status, especially in our sacred spaces.”
Keadle said they are educating their members so everyone is informed on what their rights are if immigration enforcement comes to his church. He said the church has taken steps to define public and private spaces within the community.
The Los Angeles Unified School District also has a plan if ICE comes to a LAUSD school to carry out immigration enforcement.
Tanya Ortiz Franklin, a member of the Board of Education from the seventh district, said the LAUSD is not changing any day-to-day protocols because of the directive.
Although no agents have been on campuses thus far, Franklin says some have tried.
“What we actually are expecting to see a bit more of is ICE agents coming to the front office and asking to see students,” Franklin said. “And what they would need to prove is a judicial warrant that our schools have been trained to look for, named students, the warrant has to be signed by a judge.”
She said if ICE agents came to a school, officials from the operations office and general counsel would be contacted right away to verify credentials and documents before anyone would be allowed to enter campus.
Franklin said even if agents had a judicial warrant she still believes there would be challenges in court.
At St. John’s Cathedral and St. Mark’s Lutheran Church, both located within a two mile radius from USC, clergy said they have not encountered any immigration enforcement yet, but do have plans in place if ICE came to their churches.
Soriano said there is fear within the community to come to the church for essential needs because of unease over immigration rules.
“One person impacted was impacted by the fires … and is also afraid to come to talk and pray and get pastoral care and that just really upsets us as people who believe we should take care of each other,” Soriano said.
He said protocols of how to respond if ICE came to his church are currently being developed.
Religious groups are pushing back in court, with 27 Christian and Jewish groups suing over the new Trump administration policy.
They argue the fear of raids is hurting attendance at places of worship and inhibiting people’s freedom to practice their faith, protected under the First Amendment.
“There is the well-respected and practiced idea that church and state are separate and that churches can be a sanctuary,” Soriano said. “So this idea that through an individual’s directive that this long-held policy would no longer stand was considered an affront and was hopefully going to be challenged.”