The recent public spat between Vice President JD Vance and the U.S. Catholic bishops over the church’s position on immigration may suggest that there is no common ground between the Trump administration and the church on this issue. To be sure, the wall between them is high, but here are a few areas for possible dialogue and, on one or two issues, collaboration.
Anti-human-trafficking efforts. The church has spoken out consistently and strongly against human trafficking, in which migrants, especially women and children, are taken to other countries by traffickers to work in the sex industry or in manual labor. Pope Francis has called the practice an “open wound” on contemporary society and “a scourge upon the body of Christ.” President Trump has also generally supported anti-human-trafficking efforts, especially to protect children, and in late January, the Department of Justice recognized National Human Trafficking Prevention Month. But any dialogue on this issue should begin with the Catholic bishops explaining to Mr. Trump how gutting foreign aid and services to unaccompanied migrant children, as his administration has done, can lead to an increase in human trafficking.
Undocumented youth. Mr. Trump said last December, before assuming office, that he wants to “work something out” to allow undocumented people brought to this country as children, popularly known as Dreamers, to remain in the United States. The U.S. bishops have long supported a path to citizenship for the more than 2.2 million people (as counted by the Center for Migration Studies of New York) who were brought to the United States at a young age by their parents and are now well into adulthood.
It is unclear exactly where Mr. Trump will land on this issue. In his first term, he tried to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program that protects Dreamers from deportation. He would likely limit any legislative remedy by granting legal status to about 600,000 DACA recipients but not offering a path to citizenship. Perhaps the Trump administration, some Republican leaders (like Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a Dream Act co-sponsor), the U.S. bishops and the Dreamers themselves can find a compromise that would finally provide legal certainty to a group who are citizens of this country in every sense of the word except on paper.
Refugee resettlement. As one of the largest refugee resettlement organizations in the world, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has long supported and participated in the U.S. refugee program, which takes refugees from all backgrounds and faiths, and has strongly opposed the recent shutdown of the program by the administration. In fact, the U.S.C.C.B. recently filed a lawsuit against the administration for stopping contractual payments for services provided by the Catholic resettlement network to recently arrived refugees.
Mr. Trump also halted the program in his first term but reopened it a few months later, resettling refugees on a much smaller scale. Whether he starts it again may depend on the arguments made by the U.S.C.C.B. and other faith-based groups, including evangelicals, about the efficiency of the program and how it advances U.S. interests overseas.
The right of a sovereign nation to control its borders. The U.S.C.C.B. states that the right to control one’s borders is a principle of Catholic social teaching, but border management must be implemented in concert with the protection of human rights and human dignity, including the right to apply for asylum. The church also supports the expansion of legal avenues for immigrants to enter the United States in a safe and orderly manner, so they are not compelled to make dangerous journeys to the U.S. border.
There is obviously a large gulf between the Trump administration’s and the U.S.C.C.B.’s positions on this issue, as Mr. Trump has already closed down the border, greatly weakened the right to asylum, reinstated the Remain in Mexico program that sends asylum seekers back across the border to await the adjudication of their cases, and indicated his intention to continue building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. As Pope Francis has said, we must build bridges, not walls.
Another aspect of national sovereignty is the enforcement of immigration laws, which involves the detention and deportation of immigrants. The church teaches that deportation is legitimate only if due process is followed, human dignity is respected, and those who are a violent threat to the community are prioritized for removal—not immigrants and their families who have contributed to the nation. The bishops also would support reintegration programs in countries of origin—not in third countries, where the Trump administration has sent some migrants—so that migrants who are returned have a chance to find livelihoods and live in dignity in their home countries.
Mass deportations, which can indiscriminately target immigrants, undermine due process, disrupt communities and separate families, are a violation of Catholic teaching, as Pope Francis recently reaffirmed in his letter to the U.S. bishops.Instead, the church would argue that the vast majority of undocumented immigrants with equities in the country should have an opportunity to remain and earn their citizenship.
Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso, Tex., chairman of the U.S.C.C.B.’s Committee on Migration, recently and publicly invited Mr. Vance to enter a conversation with him on migration issues, including the role of the church in assisting immigrants and refugees. Hopefully, the vice president will take the bishop up on his offer and at least attempt to engage the U.S. bishops directly on the issue.
To be clear, Catholic leaders and Mr. Trump may agree in principle in these areas, which is at least a starting point for discussions. Coming to a consensus, or even a compromise, on how to address them is the true challenge.
Dialogue, however, is more constructive than exchanging fire in public. And if it helps at least some of the millions of immigrants and refugees in need of support, it would be well worth the effort.
