Court battle continues as lawmaker intervenes to save pilgrimage site from Trump seizure

(OSV News) — The Trump administration’s move to seize a New Mexico pilgrimage site for border wall construction — despite religious liberty objections — continues to be contested in court, as a Texas lawmaker has introduced legislation to stop the takeover.

An attorney working to protect the site called the federal government’s claim, which seeks to dismiss any consideration of religious freedom, “a stunning and legally untenable position.”

The Diocese of Las Cruces, New Mexico, has for several weeks been battling the administration’s efforts to gain control over a 14-acre parcel that includes Mount Cristo Rey, located in Sunland Park, New Mexico.

The 4,675-foot peak, capped by a 29-foot limestone statue of Jesus Christ the King, has served as a shrine for Catholic faithful for close to a century.

Each year, thousands trek up the rugged path to the image, which depicts a robed Christ with arms stretched out against the cross, overlooking El Paso, Texas, and southern New Mexico landscapes.

The federal government filed a May 7 lawsuit, claiming eminent domain — or government power to seize private property for public use, with “just compensation” as required by the Fifth Amendment — over the land.

The diocese has invoked its rights under the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the latter of which expands protections for religious exercise beyond those covered under the former.

RFRA prohibits the government from placing a substantial burden on a person’s exercise of religion without compelling government interest, and even in those circumstances, requires that they do so by the least restrictive means.

As the case plays out in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico, Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, introduced the “Mount Cristo Rey Protection Act” July 20.

The measure would recognize the property as a holy site, while prohibiting the use of federal funds for both building the intended border wall at Mount Cristo Rey and for litigating against the Las Cruces Diocese.

The same day Escobar announced the proposed protection act, the Trump administration told the court that the diocese’s religious freedom argument was “wrong and unsupported by any case law.”

“The First Amendment is not a shield from condemnation; it does not grant churches or newsrooms or places of assembly immunity from condemnation,” said the federal government — using the synonymous legal term for eminent domain — in a July 20 filing.

Instead, said the Trump administration, the “only constitutional limitation” is the Fifth Amendment’s just compensation requirement.

“The Diocese is not the first religious institution from whom the federal government has condemned land,” but “at least the sixth,” said the federal government in its filing.

But such “complete disregard of the protections afforded by the First Amendment and RFRA” is “a stunning and legally untenable position,” said Jonathan Backer, senior counsel at the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown University and one of the attorneys representing the Diocese of Las Cruces in the case.

In a July 27 email to OSV News, Backer noted that while the federal government has already taken the title to the land — following a June 15 ruling by U.S. District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales — “the court has not authorized the government to come onto the property and begin constructing a border wall.”

“The court has made clear that the diocese will be heard on its religious liberty objections,” said Backer.

Those objections include the diocese’s assertions that the federal government’s plan would “deface” Mount Cristo Rey, and “profane” the site with the presence of a border wall segment that would in turn likely “damage or restrict access to this sacred space.”

In addition, the diocese said in that filing, the Trump administration’s move to condemn the land and take immediate possession would “deprive” the diocese of its stewardship responsibilities, which ensure that “successor landowners do not use Diocesan property in ways that are inconsistent with Catholic values and teachings.”

The diocese has also demanded a jury trial to settle the amount of the legally required just compensation, determined by the fair market value of the property, which the federal government currently estimates to be $183,071.

But in its July 6 filing, the diocese rejected that amount, noting that the federal government “has not conducted a site visit” to assess the property.

In addition, said the diocese, the federal government assessed a much higher value for a nearby state-owned 7.3-acre site it also wishes to seize for the border wall, valuing that parcel at $798,500.

On June 28, Bishop Peter Baldacchino of Las Cruces led more than 500 faithful from the dioceses of Las Cruces and El Paso, along with the Archdiocese of Santa Fe, in pilgrimage and prayer to protect the shrine.

In his homily at the Mass he concelebrated on the mountain with Auxiliary Bishop Anthony C. Celino of El Paso, Bishop Baldacchino prayed that civil leaders would uphold religious liberty, which he noted is regarded by the Church as “not an optional charity,” but rather as “a basic right” that “protects the Church’s ability to serve publicly.”

Gonzales has given the diocese until Aug. 3 to reply to the federal government’s latest filing, with the Trump administration subsequently due to respond by Aug. 10.

Read More Immigration and Migration

Those targeted by immigration enforcement need ‘chance to be heard,’ says nun detained by ICE

Attacks on human dignity can never be normalized, say 2 US bishops after deadly ICE shootings

Catholics offer prayers, express solidarity over 2 ICE shooting deaths in less than a week

A miracle at sea and the faith of a young immigrant father

Supreme Court strikes down some Trump priorities, but expands presidential power

On U.S. Independence Day, Pope Leo XIV honors migrants in Lampedusa

Copyright © 2026 OSV News

 Print