(RNS) — A federal judge issued an order on Friday (Feb. 13) barring federal immigration enforcement agents from raiding certain churches except in a “true emergency,” handing a preliminary win to a growing number of faith groups that have sued President Donald Trump’s administration over its decision to end restrictions on raids at houses of worship.

Judge F. Dennis Saylor of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued a preliminary injunction, siding mostly with the religious plaintiffs. The case, filed last July, centers on faith groups who argued their religious freedom — particularly rights guaranteed by the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act — had been violated by the president’s decision to rescind a 2011 internal government policy that discouraged immigration raids at “sensitive locations” such as hospitals, schools and churches. 

Although the judge decided that three of the plaintiffs — a trio of regional Quaker groups — lacked standing, the injunction will apply to all the other plaintiffs, which include five regional synods of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America as well as churches affiliated with American Baptist Churches USA, Alliance of Baptists and Metropolitan Community Churches. It does not apply to houses of worship that were not involved in the lawsuit. 

“In substance, the preliminary injunction will prohibit warrantless enforcement actions — absent exigent circumstances — inside a church, at the entrance to a church, at a religious education facility (such as a Sunday school), at a religious social-service facility (such as a day-care center), or on adjacent church property (such as a parking lot),” the ruling read.

The judge also barred immigration enforcement “within 100 feet of the entrance to a church, absent exigent circumstances or supervisory approval,” and disallowed agents from “knowingly setting up checkpoints to interrogate persons on their way to or from a church.”

Saylor permitted the federal government to take action at a church “in emergency situations,” describing a potential scenario where “an armed and dangerous individual attempted to take refuge in a church.” But the judge suggested such a situation would be rare and noted that raids on churches would not be allowed only because agents have “supervisory approval.”

“The Court can conceive of no circumstance, outside of a true emergency, in which a law-enforcement operation to enforce the immigration laws inside a church would be justifiable under the First Amendment and RFRA,” the ruling read.

The reference to supervisors appears to be a rebuke of the government’s current policy. When Religion News Service asked Department of Homeland Security officials last year about incidents of apparent immigration enforcement in or around churches since Trump assumed office, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said officers need “secondary supervisor approval before any action can be taken in locations such as a church or a school.”

In a statement Monday, McLaughlin said the court order “is based on a false narrative,” adding, “Let me be clear: (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) does NOT raid churches.” McLaughlin argued the ruling is an attempt to “demonize our brave ICE law enforcement,” who she said were facing an increase in assaults and death threats, and referenced a recent protest at a church in Minnesota by demonstrators who claimed a pastor there worked for ICE. (Several of the demonstrators and two journalists who covered the protest have since been arrested.)

However, an RNS analysis last August found at least 10 reports of apparent federal agents conducting immigration enforcement actions on or in the immediate vicinity of church property. At least one in June included video evidence: A pastor in California filmed apparent federal agents as they detained a man in her church parking lot, as the pastor insisted they leave the property. The following month, San Bernardino Bishop Alberto Rojas lifted the obligation for Catholics in his diocese to attend Mass if are concerned aboutICE raids, citing what he said were recent instances of federal agents detaining parishioners at two churches in the region.

And earlier this month, agents were filmed arresting a man on the grounds of North Hills United Methodist Church in the Los Angeles area, which local faith leaders criticized.

In a statement, a spokesperson for Democracy Forward, one of the legal groups representing the plaintiffs, said a judge issued a similar ruling last year in another case brought by a group of Quaker organizations, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship denomination and a Sikh temple in Sacramento, California.

“This is the second federal court to confirm what we have long known: the Trump-Vance administration’s attempt to turn sacred houses of worship into houses of fear for immigrant communities is unlawful,” Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, said in a statement.

The impact of the new ruling may be larger, however, as the plaintiffs appear to represent a much higher number of churches.

At least four separate lawsuits involving dozens of religious denominations and groups have been filed over the president’s decision to rescind the sensitive locations policy, all claiming the move violates their religious freedom. 

Despite Friday’s ruling, some worry that tensions between the federal government and faith groups are primed to escalate further this year. According to Wired, ICE is planning to build new offices in multiple locations that sit near houses of worship.