Battle Over Catholic Migrant Shelter Network Playing Out in Texas Supreme Court
Annunciation House in El Paso has served more than 500,000 migrants since opening in 1978.
By Gary Gately
The Texas Supreme Court is weighing decidedly different views of Annunciation House, a 46-year-old Catholic network of migrant shelters in El Paso, as the national debate over immigration plays out in microcosm at the state’s border with Mexico.
Texas’ Republican attorney general, Ken Paxton, argues that Annunciation House should be closed for facilitating illegal immigration, harboring undocumented immigrants, “human smuggling” and “operating a stash house.”
But in July, Texas District Court Judge Francisco X. Dominguez denied Paxton’s attempt to shut down Annunciation House, saying it violated the shelter network’s First Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution and the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The 1999 state law forbids the government to “impose regulations that place a substantial burden on a person's free exercise of religion.”
Dominguez also said Paxton’s demands for documents containing private information about Annunciation House clients violated the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure.
The judge called Paxton’s behavior “outrageous and intolerable” and said his office sought the documents as “a pretext to justify its harassment of Annunciation House employees and the persons seeking refuge.”
Paxton, who has called the influx of undocumented immigrants a “foreign invasion,” appealed directly to the Texas Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments in Austin Monday.
Texas Assistant Attorney General Ryan Baasch told the state Supreme Court’s justices that the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act does not preclude enforcing other state laws making it illegal to protect immigrants in the country illegally.
But some of the justices on the all-Republican Supreme Court expressed skepticism over that argument.
“Annunciation House is not immunized because of its religion,” Baasch said.
“Do you disagree that this is religious activity?” Justice Debra Lehrmann asked Baasch.
“It may be, and then there’s going to be a question of whether the activity at issue here substantially burdens the religious activity,” Baasch replied.
“So you want to deter organizations from exercising their religious activity?” Lehrmann said.
Bauch said the state did not seek to do so, but rather “wants to deter organizations from knowingly and deliberately sheltering illegally present aliens.”
The attorney general’s office did not respond to requests for comment.
Paxton said in a statement after appealing to the state Supreme Court in July: “For too long, Annunciation House has flouted the law and contributed to the worsening illegal immigration crisis at Texas’s border with Mexico. I am appealing this case and will continue to vigorously enforce the law against any [non-governmental organization] engaging in criminal conduct.”
During oral arguments, Annunciation House lawyer Amy Warr countered that the AG’s Office’s efforts to shut down the shelter network violate its First Amendment guarantees of religion, free speech and association as well as the Fourth Amendment.
Warr strongly denied the claim that Annunciation House seeks to hide undocumented immigrants from law enforcement.
“It’s very important to separate the state’s rhetoric here from the record,” she said. “There is absolutely no evidence of concealment. There has been no violation of the harboring statute because Annunciation House, an established ministry of the Catholic Church, does not hide undocumented people from law enforcement.”
She noted that most migrants who enter Annunciation House have been processed and released by immigration authorities while their cases are pending
“Law enforcement knows we are there, knows that we house undocumented people,” Warr said. “If they want to pick somebody up, they come with a warrant and they get the person — or they wait outside until the person comes out. They have full means to do this.”
First Liberty Institute, a conservative religious freedom organization based in Plano, Texas, also argued on behalf of Annunciation House in a brief filed with the court.
Elizabeth Kiernan, a First Liberty attorney, told the justices that Annunciation House has “answered the gospel of Matthew’s call to care for the least of these in the service of Christ,” adding: “The Catholic Church has claimed Annunciation House as one of its own, and Annunciation House’s founder testified that its acts of charity are motivated by its Catholic faith. If [the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act] protects anything, it protects this religious charity against outright closure.”
The Texas Conference of Catholic Bishops also filed a brief on behalf of Annunciation House.
“There is no doubt that Annunciation House engages in its free exercise of sincere religious beliefs, and the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act protects its right to exercise its religion,” the bishops’ brief states. “Any claim that Annunciation House violates the law by opening its doors to the needy is plainly wrong. As it proclaims to the public, Annunciation House carries out its Catholic mission, humbly but resolutely, by feeding and sheltering poor migrants. There is nothing secret, nor nefarious, about this vital mission.”
But as President-elect Donald J. Trump vows to shut down America’s borders and deport 11 million undocumented immigrants, a nonprofit organization run by his incoming White House chief of staff for policy, Stephen Miller, has joined Paxton’s office in seeking to close Annunciation House
The organization, America First Legal, based in Washington, D.C., argues in a brief filed with the Texas Supreme Court: “NGOs like Annunciation House, whether motivated by politics, religion, or otherwise, should not be permitted to undermine American law and sovereignty, exacerbate the border crisis, endanger American national security, and violate Texas laws with impunity.”
Catholic leaders throughout the country have denounced Paxton’s attempt to shut down Annunciation House, which has provided food, shelter and referrals for medical and legal support to more than 500,000 migrants since opening in 1978.
And in a CBS News “60 Minutes” interview last May, Pope Francis decried Paxton’s efforts to close Annunciation House. "That is madness, sheer madness," Francis said.
Early last year, U.S. bishops, El Paso elected officials and more than 150 organizations signed on to a Refugees International open letter condemning Paxton’s “politically motivated attack against Annunciation House.”
“Annunciation House,” the letter said, “is rooted in Catholic social teaching and is a voice for justice and compassion, especially for the most marginalized of our society.”
Weeks later, as El Paso Bishop Mark J. Seitz led a march and vigil in the border city in support of Annunciation House, another prominent Catholic advocate for immigrants, then-San Diego Cardinal Robert W. McElroy, released a statement condemning Paxton’s efforts to shutter Annunciation House.
McElroy, whom Pope Francis appointed the archbishop of Washington on January 6, said in the statement: “The state of Texas is using governmental pressure to curtail the work of the Church in one of its most fundamental obligations: to feed the hungry, to shelter the homeless, and to provide drink to the thirsty. Our Lord tells us in the Gospel of Matthew that these are the criteria on which we will be judged at the end of our lives.”
Then, in a news conference after his appointment as Washington archbishop, McElroy said: “In terms of what issue would I see coming forth in terms of the life of the Church that might be in contrast with some of the priorities that the president-elect has been talking about, I would say a large one, of course, is immigration.
“The Catholic Church teaches that a country has the right to control its borders, and our nation’s desire to do that is a legitimate effort,” McElroy added. “At the same time, we are called always to have a sense of the dignity of every human person, and thus plans, which have been talked about at some levels, of having a wider, indiscriminate, massive deportation across the country would be something that would be incompatible with Catholic doctrine. So we’ll have to see what emerges in the administration.”
Francis’ appointment of McElroy came after Trump announced as his choice for U.S. ambassador to the Vatican the president of the conservative organization CatholicVote, Brian Burch, a staunch Trump supporter who has often criticized Pope Franics.
Like Paxton, Trump has regularly played to fears of immigrant crime. He has claimed, for example, that more than 13,000 convicted murderers entered the U.S. illegally under the Biden administration. Statistics from the Department of Homeland Security, however, show that the figure spans four decades and includes those now incarcerated. Trump has also asserted — falsely — that millions of immigrants came to the U.S. illegally from jails, prisons and mental institutions.
For his part, Francis has repeatedly called for immigration reform with an emphasis on compassion by expanding legal channels of migration for those seeking asylum to escape horrors in their homelands.
In his “State of the World” address Thursday to about 185 global ambassadors representing their countries at the Holy See, Francis said: “I find it greatly disheartening to see that migration is still shrouded in a dark cloud of mistrust, rather than being seen as a source of empowerment.
“People on the move are seen simply as a problem to be managed,” the 88-year-old Jesuit pontiff added. “They cannot be treated like objects to be moved about; they have dignity and resources that they can offer to others; they have their own experiences, needs, fears, aspirations, dreams, skills and talents. It is only by viewing things in this perspective that progress can be made in confronting a phenomenon that requires the contribution of all countries, not least through the creation of safe regular pathways.”
Meanwhile, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued guidelines ahead of Trump’s January 20 inauguration calling for “targeted, proportional and human” immigration enforcement measures.
The guidelines state that “safeguarding American communities and upholding the rule of law are laudable goals” but add: “A country’s rights to regulate its borders and enforce its immigration laws must be balanced with its responsibilities to uphold the sanctity of human life, respect the God-given dignity of all persons, and enact policies that further the common good.”
The bishops said enforcement measures should focus on those “who present genuine risks and dangers to society, particularly efforts to reduce gang activity, stem the flow of drugs, and end human trafficking.”
“The dehumanization or vilification of non-citizens as a means to deprive them of protection under the law is not only contrary to the rule of law but an affront to God himself, who has created them in his own image,” the statement continued. “Further restricting access to humanitarian protections will only endanger those who are most vulnerable and deserving of relief.”
Watch the oral arguments before the Texas Supreme Court here: