The U.S. Has Deported Migrants to a Foreign Concentration Camp Without Due Process — Christians Should Care
By Nicholas Miller, JD, PhD
A historian of 1930s Germany wrote of the dark paradox of the celebration of Easter in that ostensibly Christian country. It was a time when German Lutherans went to remember and reflect on the mistreatment, persecution, and execution of a first century Jew; while all around them 20th century Jews were being mistreated, persecuted, and eventually also executed. While the churchgoers sang hymns, meditated on, and celebrated the former, most of them had little to nothing to say about the latter, either quietly accepting the persecution of the Jews, or even endorsing it.
Are we are experiencing a similar phenomenon today? The story of Christ involves the false arrest, illegal imprisonment, undeserved beating, and unjust trial and execution of the most innocent man in history. Principles of both Jewish and Roman law were violated by an illegal night arrest, a hasty trial held after sunset, a lack of arraignment, and the use of false and conflicting witness testimony. Pilate was so aware of the problems of executing a man without sufficient evidence that he literally and famously washed his hands of the whole event.
As modern American Christians reflect this weekend on these events, many of them have nothing to say about the mistaken or unprovoked arrest, unconstitutional deportation, and illegal imprisonment in a foreign concentration camp of not just one Maryland father, but hundreds of other migrants. Now, many will say that the difference between the two stories is that Jesus was innocent; but that all these migrants are guilty of at least unlawful entry into the United States, and many of them of worse crimes.
But here is where the comparison with the Christ story becomes really interesting and disturbing. French philosopher René Girard argues that the crucifixion of Christ unmasks and reveals the bankruptcy of the historical use of the scapegoat principle; a phenomena which society uses to unify itself by placing blame for its problems on some small and unpopular minority. It is a universal human condition, he asserts, as all cultures and societies around the world experience growing tensions and animosities fueled by competition for limited resources, and a gap between the haves and the have nots.
As the gap grows, clever and unscrupulous leaders, in defending the vested interests of themselves and their supporters, find a small, marginal, and unpopular minority to blame for the problems in society. This scapegoating draws the majority together in greater unity, diverts the attention of the populace from the real culprits of scarcity and inequality, and keeps a relative level of domestic peace and tranquility. Of course, this peace comes at the expense of the health, safety, and at times, lives, of the scapegoated person or group.
Recent examples of this practice include the Jews in Germany, the Tutsi’s in Rwanda, and the minority ethnic victims of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. Jews of course have often played this role in the centuries since the death of Christ. Other scapegoats have included “witches” in the Middle Ages and colonial America, victims of the Crusades and Inquisition, and in the many ancient cultures that practiced human sacrifice. It is seen in almost every society where there are groups that differ from the majority culture in language, ethnicity, or social practices.
Girard argued that the death of Christ, the most innocent man in history, on the cross for crimes he did not commit, forever unmasked the scapegoating practice for what it was—a fault and evil of the majoritarian society, rather than actually being justified by the faults of the targeted victims. Given human fallenness and cupidity, there is always an argument that some person or group of people are guilty of something, and therefore deserve their fate. But the reality is that the scapegoats are being treated far worse than they actually deserve, and are likely more innocent than their abusers.
Is not the same true in our situation today? Yes, it seems that all the migrants deported to El Salvador probably came into the US unlawfully. Although we don’t even know that for sure. There were no formal hearings to determine their status, and we know that at least one, Abrego Garcia, was in lawful status under court supervision. We also know that a number of others of them had no criminal records in any country, and had no judicial determination of gang membership. Contrary to popular belief, mere undocumented presence in the US is not generally a crime. Rather, it is a civil offense, punishable by the civil penalty, after review by an immigration judge, of deportation to one’s own country.
So we do not know if all deportees to El Salvador were in undocumented status, indeed we know that at least one was not. And we simply do not know if they were guilty of other crimes, because they never had a hearing. But we do know that there was no basis in American civil, criminal, or constitutional law to arrest them and send them to a concentration camp in a foreign country that most of them had never been to.
In this, they are like the classic scapegoats of human history—fallible, flawed, imperfect, yet not much different from the rest of us who may have had a speeding violation or been late on our taxes or forgotten to timely change our driver’s license when moving to another state.
Should there be penalties for these careless and sometimes even willful acts? Sure, and most of us have paid our share of speeding tickets. But none of this would justify our late night abduction, transfer across country, and placement in the most notorious concentration camp in the western hemisphere without a hearing. So why is it acceptable for this to happen to our migrant neighbors?
The short answer is, because they have become scapegoats, used by certain political leaders to consolidate political support, unify their base, and grasp power for themselves. They then turn these social resentments and frustrations towards an easy, indefensible target and away from those forces, powers, and persons truly responsible for our current dilemmas.
And this political power play is part of the revelation of Easter, part of what Christ came to unmask—to show the unfairness and evilness of the scapegoating principle. Christians of all people should see this scapegoating for what it is—a Satanic strategy to lay the blame for the world’s evil at the door of someone else, anyone else, especially a marginal, defenseless else. An act of deflection and blame that will shield the rest of us from dealing with our own failings, shortcomings, and personal and systemic problems.
This Easter weekend, we should see in the faces of Abrego Garcia and his imprisoned migrant friends, imperfectly and dimly, but clearly reflected the face of the One who was truly just and innocent, and yet treated with a similar injustice and severity as they are being treated. In closing our ears to calls for justice and due process for them, we are showing how we would truly have reacted to the calls for fairness and justice for Christ.
We show who we would be shouting for when Pilate gave the Jews the choice to free either Christ or Barabbas—a Jewish zealot, given to extremism and violence in an effort to restore the greatness of the Jewish nation. Sadly, we can hear the call of many Christians today, not on behalf of the only mildly non-innocent among us, but on behalf of those seeking to enthrone a mythical, western-European, Christian-American heritage, at the expense of those whose diversity has made America a truly great country.
Even more sadly, those Christians who misunderstand Good Friday will not value or understand the real message of Easter morning. They have no interest or desire for the resurrection and restoration of the unjustly treated and abused; but rather view them as necessary collateral damage, human stepping stones on the way to an earthly kingdom of the “righteous.” Easter for them is the political triumph of a narrow band of American theocratic heritage, running through Puritan New England, Calvin’s Geneva, with roots in medieval Christendom; and not the broader heritage of the dissenting Protestant free church tradition that actually underlies our Bill of Rights and First Amendment.
There are some, like the apostle Peter, who did not call for a crucifixion, but who at our time of crisis, out of fear or self-preservation or desire for popularity, did not raise their voices in defense of the innocent. Rather, they deny knowing about them. “Let the government do its job, surely they are only arresting and deporting guilty people, we don’t know them, why should we second guess.” Hopefully, like Peter, these will come to their senses, see their denial of Christ’s true message, and speak out on behalf of the truth and the persecuted.
But how much better to approach Easter morning with a conscience clear because we have spoken on behalf of the abused, marginalized, and mistreated. Not because they are perfect, but because we also are imperfect; and we are equally alike the recipient of the sacrifice of a Christ who was perfect. One whose experience shows us the wrongness of blaming and misusing others for our own sins and shortcomings. Because He is risen, we can speak on behalf of those that especially need a resurrection.
Nicholas Miller, JD, PhD, is Professor of Law and Religions of the Honors College of Washington Adventist University in Maryland, and Research Professor of Church History at Andrews University in Michigan. He is author of “The Religious Roots of the First Amendment” (Oxford University Press, 2012) and co-editor of the “Oxford Handbook of Seventh-day Adventism” (2024).. The views he expresses here are his own.