“I Think The U.S. Conference Of Catholic Bishops Has, Frankly, Not Been A Good Partner . . ."

I found a surprisingly even-handed story on Vice President Vance's exchange with Margaret Brennan on yesterday's Face the Nation that covered, in part, the USCCB's condemnation of Trump's immigration-related executive orders, at America magazine. The full interview is embedded above. The America piece reports,

In Vance’s first interview since becoming vice president, host Margaret Brennan noted that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops “condemned” Trump’s immigration-related executive orders, and asked Vance, “Do you personally support the idea of conducting a raid or enforcement action in a church service, at a school?”

“Of course, if you have a person who is convicted of a violent crime, whether they’re an illegal immigrant or a non-illegal immigrant, you have to go and get that person to protect the public safety. That’s not unique to immigration,” he said.

“But let me just address this particular issue,” he continued. “Because as a practicing Catholic, I was actually heartbroken by that statement. And I think that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops needs to actually look in the mirror a little bit and recognize that when they receive over $100 million to help resettle illegal immigrants, are they worried about humanitarian concerns? Or are they actually worried about their bottom line? We’re going to enforce immigration law. We’re going to protect the American people.”

the America piece then clarifies the Catholic Church's role in administering immigration aid, or at least its legally circumscribed role:

The USCCB is one of 10 national resettlement agencies that receive federal funding and partner with local organizations to assist refugee populations that qualify for federal assistance. Those populations include people resettled via the U.S. refugee admissions program, certain groups of vulnerable noncitizen children, and certain other groups such as victims of human trafficking and torture.

. . . Brennan asked Vance whether he thought the USCCB is “actively hiding criminals from law enforcement?” Vance did not answer the question directly, but said the USCCB has “not been a good partner in commonsense immigration enforcement that the American people voted for.”

OSV News reached out to the USCCB for comment and is awaiting a response.

The USCCB is going to have to be very careful here, because Vance doesn't open his mouth unless he has receipts, and there are at least some bishops who must understand this. The America piece goes on,

While the funds the USCCB receives are limited to assistance for qualifying refugee populations, and therefore immigrants in the U.S. lawfully, Vance’s accusation that the funds are used to “resettle illegal immigrants” appears to mirror previous rhetoric he used. While campaigning, Vance indicated that he does not recognize the legal status of certain immigrant groups the Biden administration deemed eligible to receive temporary protected status, or TPS.

However, TPS recipients are not eligible for the federal funding received by the USCCB for refugee resettlement. Other immigrant populations not eligible for federal assistance received by the USCCB include migrants seeking asylum, humanitarian parolees, employment-based immigrants, family-based immigrants, DACA recipients, and people who are stateless.

But much of the controversy over the Haitian immigrants in Springfield, OH, who are in the country on TPS, centers on the assistance they're given by Catholic Charities:

A new Springfield facility that will provide services including help with immigration status applications, legal advocacy and case management, will open this year.

Located at 448 E. High St., it will be operated by Catholic Charities of Southwest Ohio, which has been providing aid in Springfield for about a year and a half, CEO Tony Stieritz said during a Haitian Coalition meeting Wednesday. He said he is expecting to be able to begin providing services within a month.

It might be possible for the USCCB to argue that the federal funding to Catholic Charities is carefully separated from the services to Springfield Haitians who aren't eligible, but even there, money is fungible, and legitimate aid to Program A, non-TPS, frees up extra money that can be spent on Program B, TPS, not eligible for aid. Beyond that, there are two additional problems.

One is that the Haitians, even if they aren't committing violent crimes, are driving with0out licenses, ignoring traffic laws, and driving without insurance, a problem that's generally acknowledged is hurting the community at large. The second section of CCC 2241 says,

Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants' duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.

Where is the Catholic Church in counseling these people to learn to drive, obtain licenses, and get insurance?

The other problem is that by in effect subsidizing the incomes of the Haitian immigrants, Catholic Charities enables the sweatshop employers who've brought them in to pay the Haitrians the lowest possible wages. In effect, the Catholic Church is complicit in exploiting sweatshop conditions.

Finally, the Haitians are causing additional problems by being slow to assimilate or learn English, which puts additional burdens on the local schools and other services. One accusation from Springfield citizens has been that Catholic Charities has been part of this problem.

This all leaves aside the issue Vance raises, that the bishops seem to be ignoring the widepread exploitation of vulnerable immigrants who can be trafficked in the current chaotic environment.

I suspect that Vance's use of the phrase "good partner" here is deliberate and carefully selected, and it could well come out in further dialogue. The bishops will need to be very careful moving forward.