ANALYSIS: US bishops mark limits to the expansion of the border wall

Analysis: With the new expense bill that promotes an important expansion of the border wall, the bishops warn that suffering will increase and ask for comprehensive reform.

The United States Congress, after much debate and delay, has approved an extensive budget project, known colloquially as the “Great and Beautiful” bill. Among other expenses, the project destinations Approximately 46.5 million dollars to new border wall segments, together with others approximately 120 billion for infrastructure of the Department of National Security and the application of the immigration law, including the expansion of the United States Immigration and Customs Control Agency (ICE).

Currently, approximately 1,137 kilometers of the nearly 3,145 kilometers of the border between the United States and Mexico are covered by a wall, a fence or another barrier form, including parts of the Rio Grande.

The new bill would allocate funds for a significant expansion comprising 1,128 kilometers of primary wall, 1,012 kilometers of parallel secondary fences, 227 kilometers of barriers for vehicles and pedestrians, and 1,448 kilometers of river barriers, similar to the deployed by Texas in the Rio Grande in 2023.

The supporters present the allocation of funds as a more concrete phase in the response of President Donald Trump to a problem of decades at the southern border with Mexico. Meanwhile, critics see a strategy based solely on the application of the law that treats vulnerable people as problems to be isolated with walls.

Among the latter are several Catholic bishops whose recent statements, although they arise from different practical experiences and practical realities, converge in a central moral judgment: a policy that predicts human suffering is contrary to both the gospel and the social doctrine of the Church about dignity and human rights.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in its numeral 2241, affirms the right of a nation to regulate its borders and safeguard the communities within them, when it says: “The civil authorities … can subordinate the exercise of the right of immigration to various legal conditions.”

According to the catechism, nations may also demand that immigrants fulfill certain civic duties and laws, when it teaches: “The immigrant is obliged to respect the material and spiritual heritage of the country that welcomes it, to obey their laws and contribute to their burdens.”

However, Catholic teaching goes beyond this. The catechism also states: “The most prosperous nations have the duty to host, as possible, abroad that seeks security and livelihoods that cannot be found in their country of origin. The authorities must ensure that the natural right that places the guest under the protection of those who receive it is respected.”

Danger deterrence is immoral

On June 26, Cardinals Robert Mcelroy of Washington DC, and Joseph Tobin de Newark, New Jersey, joined 18 other bishops and numerous religious leaders in the signing of a letter urging Congress to reject the measure, warning that the wall “will push migrants to the most remote regions of the border and cause an increase in death migrants ”.

The new letter reiterates that a wall “would damage the local environment … and force desperate asylum seekers … to depend more and more for people traffickers.” The main concern is the fatal displacement that will surely follow.

In one interview With CNN on July 3, Cardinal Mcelroy was even more emphatic.

“It is correct to be able to control our borders. However, what is happening now is something beyond that,” said the cardinal. “It is a massive and indiscriminate deportation of men, women, children and families that literally destroys families and is destined to do so.”

“This is not only incompatible with Catholic teaching; it is inhuman and morally disgusting,” he added.

Eco of the Obispo Seitz

Cardinal Mcelroy’s urgent concerns reflect what Bishop Mark Seitz de El Paso, Texas, president of the Migration Committee for US Bishops, declared in 2023.

“We have long been against the construction of a wall that covers the entire border between the United States and Mexico, especially for the dangers it represents for human life and the environment.”

In 2023, the bishops described the previous Border Security Law, which had parallel provisions for detention and criminalization, as well as funds for a border wall, as “incompatible with the Catholic social doctrine” and inconsistent “with the widely bipartisan commitment of our nation with humanitarian protection.”

Bishop Seitz concluded: “No combination of legal routes or strict measures of application will be sufficient … only … addressing the fundamental causes and promoting integral human development throughout America, together with a reform of our immigration system, we can achieve the necessary conditions to sustainably reduce irregular migration.”

Colorado and Arizona bishops are pronounced

Similarly, the bishops of Colorado, although they condemned an open border policy, They pointed out That waiting for the approval of temporary or permanent immigration applications “takes years and is expensive”, which “is not conducive to families that need to migrate quickly to hold their lives.” They encouraged government officials to “welcome abroad” as well as assume responsibility for “guaranteeing the security and well -being of local communities.”

Two bishops from Arizona, John Dolan de Phoenix and Edward Weisenburger, previously from Tucson but now pastor of Detroit, They also expressed their “serious concern” for the “abuse of undocumented people who are our neighbors” at the end of 2024. They joined a group of 10 Christian leaders to publish a column in the Central Az newspaper, in which they affirmed: “While we recognize the legitimate right of nations to monitor and control their borders, we also recognize that, in many aspects, our current migration laws in the United States do not respect the United States worthy, family unit and security. ”

Safe borders and immigrant care

Cardinal Timothy Dolan from New York already He had spoken At the beginning of the year, qualifying the United States as a “nation with a proud legacy of Immigrants’ reception that” also needs safe and protected borders. ” At the same time, he insisted that the Church “should not be criticized for simply obeying the Bible and taking care of those immigrants” that seek to navigate what he described as a “clumsy and fractured” migratory system.

The Archbishop of Los Angeles, Mons. José Gomez, framed the bill within a policy prone to instrumentalize and dehumanize the most vulnerable. In a rehearsal Published on June 17 in Angelus News, he wrote: “We can agree that the previous administration in Washington was too far when assuring our borders and allowing too many people to enter our country without being examined. But the current administration has not offered any immigration policy beyond the declared objective of deporting thousands of people every day. This is not a policy, it is a punishment, and it can only result in cruel and arbitrary results.”

Archbishop Gomez pointed out in his opinion article: “The last reform of our immigration laws was in 1986”. He added: “It is time for a new national immigration conversation, one that is realistic and makes the necessary moral distinctions and practices.”

On the same day of the interreligious letter, the United States Catholic Bishop Conference (USCCB) He went directly to the senators. A letter from Archbishop Timothy Broglio, president of the conference, is based on a May letter and offers a more nuanced response than the 20 bishops signed by the interreligious letter. It praises parts of the bill, such as their provisions that “support the choice of parents in education” and cuts to the Federal Financing of Planned Parenthood, but also offers a strong criticism of the parts of the project that “harm the poor and vulnerable”, such as cuts to food assistance and medical care programs.

In one declaration that accompanies the letterArchbishop Broglio said the bill “removes the poor to give the rich … and does not protect families by promoting an exclusively repressive approach to immigration.”

The challenge of immigration

Three bishops of the border state of New Mexico They added their voices to those of his brothers in the episcopate. In his letter, Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe, Bishop Peter Baldacchino de las Cruces and Bishop James Wall of Gallup indicate that the American immigration system is currently “broken and needs reform”, and add that “many who arrive in our nation are forced to migrate due to oppression and persecution (as) … The drug.

Since the preeminent pillar of the Catholic social doctrine is the dignity of the human person, the bishops therefore denounce a plan to mass who have “built links in our communities and do not represent a threat … to the humanitarian principles and our national interest.” In addition, they urge legislators to prioritize “bipartisan negotiations to repair the United States immigration system”.

In 2019, in Brownsville, Texas, it was planned for a proposed section of the wall to cross diocesan property. Brownsville’s bishop, Daniel Flores, He said to Wall Street Journal In forceful terms: “I do not want to use the property of the Church to say that, regardless of how desperate your life is, you cannot be received here … the government will have to take the earth. The Church will not give it to it.” The wall, he insisted, would hinder the ministry of the Church and his testimony of Christ refugee.

Bishops make it clear that border security and human dignity are not opposite objectives, but complementary responsibilities. Although the official Posture of the USCCB is opposed to a fortified wall on our southern border, the bishops of the United States support the human application of national laws, respecting the rights of migrants. They call Congress to reform what has long been considered a fractured system, leaving intact many of the fundamental causes of immigration.

If Congress listens to that advice, it will determine not only the fate of millions, but also its moral credibility in the coming years.

Translated and adapted by the ACI Press team. Originally published in the National Catholic Register.