Since the migrant influx into Europe that defined 2015, there have been radical changes in approaches to migration governance, law, and politics in contemporary Europe. While EU states battled both ideologically and politically to contain the tide, migrants themselves, defined by various statuses, faced sociological and humanitarian challenges shaped by state policies and responses. The respective religious identities of migration groups remain, within contemporary experiences, factors to contend with, especially in relation to sovereign states' migration governance policies (integration) and in cultural diplomacy aimed at managing both religious pluralism and potential social tensions within host societies in Europe. While migrant groups tend towards maintaining their religious and cultural identities, state policies of host societies - according to experiences as well as political principles - remain the defining tools of mediation and integration. However, the general strategy and governance have remained challenging and ambivalent, eliciting debate, opposition, and the application and enforcement of critical reforms, which, in extreme cases, have led to outright rejection of migration or immigration rights. The proposed paper argues that migration and immigration governance are the responsibility of both the state and civil society, with reference to migrants' terminus ad quem. Migrant points, as a scoring system, for example, reflect policies on social inclusion, labour, education, and language, and constitute the core of policymaking. Migrant religions, which are predominantly individual, group, private, or sectarian beliefs, faith and practices that move across borders, form part of the governance focus. Contextualising the ambivalence forms the core of the paper's ethical analysis with reference to the so-called 'contestation of religious and political views' in the context of migration governance, and the general application of cultural diplomacy.