The Episcopal Church in the United States has publicly declined a federal directive to assist in resettling a group of white, Afrikaans-speaking South African refugees, citing concerns over racial justice and equity. This decision has triggered fresh debate over America’s immigration policies under the previous Trump administration and the fast-tracking of specific refugee groups.
In a strongly worded statement issued on Monday, Presiding Bishop Sean Rowe announced that the church would suspend its decades-long partnership with the U.S. government’s refugee resettlement program, specifically in opposition to what he described as a politically and racially motivated request.
A Stand for Racial Justice
“Our faith compels us to uphold the dignity of all human beings,” Bishop Rowe stated. “The Episcopal Church has a longstanding commitment to racial justice and reconciliation. To participate in the selective resettlement of one group — while so many others in desperate need are denied — would compromise our values.”
Rowe emphasized that the decision to withdraw from the resettlement initiative was not taken lightly, especially given the church’s historical role in welcoming displaced people from around the world. However, he said the church “cannot be itself” if it complies with what he called a morally unjust and discriminatory directive.
Controversial Refugee Status
The controversy erupted after a group of white South Africans, mainly Afrikaans speakers, arrived in the United States on Monday after being granted expedited refugee status. The group’s admission into the U.S. was allegedly approved during former President Donald Trump’s administration, which cited claims of persecution and land violence against white farmers in South Africa.
Trump and several of his allies had, without evidence, described the situation as a “genocide” against white South Africans — a claim strongly rejected by both U.S. human rights organizations and the South African government.
“What we’re seeing here is a case of preferential treatment wrapped in false narratives,” said Bishop Rowe. “We are deeply saddened and ashamed that while these individuals are allowed swift entry, many others who have suffered for years — including our allies from war-torn countries like Iraq and Afghanistan — are being turned away.”
Preferential Admission Sparks Backlash
The group’s arrival has intensified concerns over racial bias in U.S. refugee policy. Critics argue that the expedited treatment of white South Africans occurred even as the Trump administration effectively shut down most other refugee admissions, including those fleeing active war zones or political persecution.
“This sends a dangerous message about who is considered ‘worthy’ of safety and protection,” said Reverend Alicia Brown, a migration justice advocate with the Episcopal Migration Ministries. “There are thousands of vetted refugees — families, children, U.S. allies — still stuck in limbo, facing danger every day while others leapfrog the line for political reasons.”
According to U.S. immigration advocates, thousands of potential refugees have endured years of background checks, security screenings, and interviews only to see the system grind to a halt in recent years.
“This group was fast-tracked under a cloud of political favoritism and racial overtones,” said Brown. “It undermines the integrity of the entire resettlement process.”
South Africa Responds
South Africa’s government has strongly denied allegations that white citizens are being persecuted based on race. Responding to the U.S. resettlement news, South Africa’s Department of International Relations and Cooperation issued a statement reaffirming the country’s commitment to non-racialism and equality.
“There is no policy or systemic discrimination targeting white South Africans,” the statement read. “These unfounded claims have been promoted by international political interests seeking to distort South Africa’s ongoing land reform and social justice efforts.”
The government also criticized the U.S. decision to grant refugee status based on what it called a “misleading narrative,” warning that it could damage diplomatic relations and mischaracterize the social dynamics within South Africa.
Episcopal Church Ends Government Partnership
As part of its decision, the Episcopal Church has formally withdrawn from the federal refugee resettlement collaboration it has supported for decades through its Episcopal Migration Ministries (EMM), one of nine official agencies that partner with the U.S. State Department.
“This is not a decision we make lightly,” said Bishop Rowe. “We have walked alongside tens of thousands of refugees, regardless of religion or ethnicity. We cannot, however, allow our compassion to be weaponized for the purpose of racial preference.”
Episcopal Migration Ministries has previously played a key role in resettling refugees from conflict zones across Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia.
In recent years, EMM had also voiced concern over decreasing refugee caps and increasingly politicized criteria for resettlement, calling for a return to humanitarian principles rooted in fairness and global responsibility.
A Broader Immigration Debate
This episode is likely to feed into the broader debate about race, religion, and immigration in the United States — issues that remain deeply polarizing. Human rights organizations argue that this case highlights ongoing inequities in the U.S. immigration system, especially in how refugee status is granted or denied.
“Refugee protections should never be awarded based on skin color or political lobbying,” said Linda Martinez, Director of Refugee Watch USA. “If we are serious about protecting the vulnerable, we must apply the law fairly — regardless of race, nationality, or global politics.”
Looking Ahead
As the group of South African arrivals settles into their new lives in the U.S., questions remain about the criteria used for their selection and whether future administrations will reassess such cases. Meanwhile, the Episcopal Church’s refusal to participate may set a precedent for other faith-based and civil society organizations grappling with ethical questions around immigration policy.
Bishop Rowe concluded, “The gospel calls us to walk with the marginalized, not to choose the privileged. We will continue to serve refugees — but not at the expense of our conscience.”
