Speaking to law enforcement officers on Thursday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions claimed divine sanction for the Trump administration’s immigration policies. “Persons who violate the law of our nation are subject to prosecution,” Sessions said. “I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13 to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order.”
Later that day during the White House briefing, press secretary Sarah Sanders fended off a question from CNN’s Jim Acosta, who asked where in the Bible it says it is moral to take children away from their mothers. “I can say that it is very biblical to enforce the law,” Sanders responded. “That is actually repeated a number of times throughout the Bible.”
Remarkable discussion of how the Bible supports family separation policy, according to Jeff Sessions and Sarah Sanders. pic.twitter.com/1SJsLOF8YS
— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) June 14, 2018
This is troubling on multiple levels. The United States is constitutionally a secular republic, so it is unclear why the Bible is relevant except, perhaps, with reference to the conscience of individuals executing policy.
In any case, the policy of separating border-crossing children and parents isn’t mandated by law but is a discretionary option the Trump administration chose, with a view towards discouraging asylum seekers.
As Yoni Appelbaum of The Atlantic pointed out, the very verses Sessions cited (Romans 13) were frequently cited by antebellum slave-owners to justify obedience for the horrific policy of separating out the families of enslaved peoples:
1. "Illegal entry into the United States is a crime—as it should be…I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order.” https://t.co/BwNHzEg7Li
— Yoni Appelbaum (@YAppelbaum) June 14, 2018
2. Whatever one thinks of the exegetical merits of this argument, it’s quite surprising in one particular way—Romans 13 was widely quoted in political debates of the 1840s and 1850s, but rarely thereafter. (Via https://t.co/zs4wZX13G7) pic.twitter.com/KLCQLIGSHt
— Yoni Appelbaum (@YAppelbaum) June 14, 2018
3. There is a reason for this sudden drop-off. Abolitionists of the era argued that slavery was unconscionably cruel; in particular, they pointed to the forcible separation of families as running counter to God’s law. Apologists for slavery recognized the strength of the claim: pic.twitter.com/dsQdi4AV3a
— Yoni Appelbaum (@YAppelbaum) June 14, 2018
4. In response, defenders of slavery insisted on the duty to abide by the law—including the Fugitive Slave Act. They cited verses which stressed this duty, Romans 13:1 prominent among them. The resultant debates were fierce: pic.twitter.com/g3YsCfXnZq
— Yoni Appelbaum (@YAppelbaum) June 14, 2018
5. Romans 13:1 had been quoted on a variety of topics—including capital punishment and temperance—prior to the Civil War. Afterwards, it fell out of the political discourse, casualty to the understanding that governments of men are fallible, and can support injustice.
— Yoni Appelbaum (@YAppelbaum) June 14, 2018
And of course Romans 13, with its dubious exegetical history, doesn’t exhaust the Bible:
This Bible verse perfectly sums up the situation:
— Denizcan Grimes (@MrFilmkritik) June 14, 2018
Woe to those who make unjust laws,
to those who issue oppressive decrees,
to deprive the poor of their rights & withhold justice from the oppressed of my people,
making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless.
- Isaiah 10.1
Perhaps the best lesson is that the White House should avoid becoming a seminary.