We believe that the legal protection of religious freedom prohibits the federal government from prosecuting someone helping undocumented immigrants in a way that would otherwise violate federal law. The same is true of an individual offering sanctuary to immigrants seeking asylum: if the person is acting from a firmly held religious belief, then no federal prosecution.
We believe this position is supported by the U.S. Supreme Court and other courts interpreting the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which Congress passed in 1993 to prevent religiously neutral laws from burdening religion, even if not intending to interfere with religion.
RFRA provides an enforcement exception to a law when two conditions are met. First, the burden on religion must be necessary to further a compelling government interest. Second, the law must be the least restrictive way to further that interest.
In 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby that a small company’s religious opposition to contraception would exempt it from the Affordable Care Act requirement to provide family planning coverage to its employees.
There is much more support in the Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Scriptures for the requirement of helping refugees and immigrants than opposing contraception. Indeed, there is no biblical mandate regarding contraception.
The ancient prophets commanded the people of God to love the stranger in their land because they themselves had been “strangers in the land of Egypt.” They had sought refuge in Egypt from famine, but the Egyptians’ fear of them eventually led to their enslavement. Because God had shown mercy in delivering them as vulnerable strangers, they were to pay it forward.
Mercy to strangers is an integral part of our biblically-based faith. Popularly, Job is known for his patience; but biblically he is known for his righteousness, which he described in detail: “I was a father to the needy, and I championed the cause of the stranger….No stranger has lodged in the street; I have opened my doors to the traveler.”
Jesus teaches that the righteous will ask, “When was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you?” The answer, “Truly I tell you, just as you did it to the least of my family, you did it to me.”
We Texans are proud that our state traditionally has been one of the most refugee-welcoming. So, we were dismayed in January, when Governor Greg Abbott, a self-professed advocate of religious liberty, using an executive order by President Trump, vetoed further refugee resettlement. Texas became the first state to bar refugees; forty-two had consented.
In the last legislative session, Abbott supported the “Protection of Religious Beliefs and Moral Convictions” law (SB-1978), which prevents a government from taking adverse action against any person based, wholly or partly, on the person’s sincerely held religious belief.
For those for whom the welcoming care of refugees is a matter of biblical obedience and moral conviction, Gov. Abbott’s refugee ban is certainly an “adverse action.” The further irony of this is that many refugees are fleeing their countries because of religious persecution.
We are painfully cognizant that religious freedom can be seized upon to justify discrimination and oppression. We fear that some supporters of SB-1978 and Hobby Lobby are intent on protecting only their religious beliefs and moral convictions and no one else’s.
Religious freedom is a sword that cuts many ways. Just this month, a federal district judge overturned the convictions of four volunteers with the “No More Deaths” ministry of an Arizona church; they left jugs of water and cans of beans for undocumented migrants to find in the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge. The judge ruled that, under RFRA, they “…met their burden of establishing that their activities were exercises of their sincere religious beliefs, and the Government failed to demonstrate that application of the regulations against Defendants is the least restrictive means of accomplishing a compelling interest.”
All we ask is that Gov. Abbott, a brother in faith, repent of his adverse action, recognize that for many Texans, showing mercy to refugees is a matter of religious belief and moral conviction, and allow them to practice their faith.
(Jim Harrington and Robby Vickery are priests assisting at St. James’ Episcopal Church in Austin. Harrington is also a civil rights attorney of 47 years.)
The Hobby Lobby case is NOT about “religious freedom”, but rather about hypocritical weaponization of the First Amendment to discriminate against low income women’s health care.