Fact check: Trump plans to scrap policy restricting ICE arrests at churches, schools and hospitals

1. Summary of the results

1. Summary of the results

The statement is accurate based on the provided analyses. Multiple sources confirm Trump's intention to rescind the 2011 policy that restricts ICE arrests at sensitive locations like churches, schools, and hospitals. This change is planned for his first day in office and is part of a broader strategy aimed at conducting what Trump describes as the "largest deportation operation in American history."

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original statement omits several crucial pieces of context:

• The current policy has specific exceptions, allowing ICE to make arrests in cases involving national security threats, dangerous felons, or imminent risks
• During Trump's first term, there were already 68 ICE arrests at sensitive locations (63 planned, 5 emergency)
• As of 2019, at least 46 people were seeking deportation protection in churches across 15 states
• Immigration enforcement officials argue the current restrictions hamper their ability to enforce immigration laws effectively
• Religious leaders, particularly Catholic immigration advocates, oppose the change on grounds of religious freedom and community trust

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

While factually accurate, the statement's brevity fails to acknowledge:

• The complexity of the existing policy, which already includes exceptions for serious cases
• The competing interests at stake: ICE's enforcement capabilities versus access to essential services
• The ACLU and religious organizations warn this could create a chilling effect, deterring immigrants from accessing vital services or seeking religious sanctuary
• Law enforcement perspectives that support removing these restrictions to enhance their operational effectiveness

The statement presents a complex policy change in oversimplified terms, where both supporters (immigration enforcement officials seeking expanded authority) and opponents (religious organizations, civil rights groups) have significant interests at stake.