Attorney General

Texas Children’s Hospital fined for performing illegal ‘sex-rejecting’ procedures on minors #Catholic The historic settlement agreement between Texas Children’s Hospital, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the state of Texas has been fully executed, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said this week.Under the terms of the settlement agreement, first announced by Paxton’s office in May, Texas Children’s, the largest children’s hospital in the United States, said it would no longer provide “gender-transition” interventions, including puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, to minors, per Texas law.“This historic settlement is a resounding defeat for the radical gender ideology that has preyed on Texas children under the guise of ‘care,’” Paxton said in a press release Aug. 5.Per the executed agreement, Texas Children’s “will pay a total of million to resolve these claims,” with ,576,000 going to the state of Texas. It will also fund, for five years, a detransition clinic offering free restorative medical care to patients who previously underwent such procedures. The clinic must open by the end of October.“Texas Children’s has agreed to pay millions back to Texas,” Paxton said. “The detransition clinic, which is the first of its kind, must open within months. Activist doctors who harmed children have been fired.”The agreement also required the permanent termination and revocation of privileges for five physicians who performed these interventions.The hospital is permanently barred from rehiring or credentialing the doctors and must implement new compliance measures, including bylaw changes that will automatically revoke privileges for any physician who violates Texas law prohibiting such procedures on children.“This settlement sends an unmistakable message,” Paxton said. “If you put radical ideology over childrenʼs health, my office will go after you. We will continue to lead the way in stopping the far-left’s radical gender agenda.”The settlement agreement resolves a yearslong investigation of the hospital by the DOJ and the state of Texas that began after whistleblower allegations surfaced claiming the hospital had continued performing sex-change procedures on minors in secret even after state lawmakers made such procedures illegal.The Justice Department said in May that the Houston-based hospital had agreed to pay millions in civil penalties and damages for allegedly falsely billing Medicaid and other insurers for “pediatric sex-rejecting procedures.”The federal government had alleged that the hospital violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the False Claims Act, and federal fraud and conspiracy laws.Following the publication of a directive by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott that transgender procedures on minors that could be considered “child abuse” under existing state law, Texas Children’s announced in 2022 that it would cease “sex-change” therapies and procedures, citing concerns that these practices were potentially illegal.In 2023 Texas passed a law that explicitly banned puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and gender-transition surgeries for minors under 18.Nevertheless, at least three doctors associated with Texas Children’s — Richard Roberts, David Paul, and Kristy Rialon — continued to perform “sex-rejecting” procedures on children throughout 2022 and 2023, according to whistleblower evidence published by Christopher Rufo, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute.Rufo claimed that Rialon had been performing surgeries on minors ranging in age from 15 to as young as 1.Calling the settlement “historic,” Paxton said in May that it “will ensure that the deranged child mutilators who hurt our kids are fired and held accountable.”According to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, the DOJ “will use every weapon at its disposal to end the destructive and discredited practice of so-called ‘gender-affirming care’ for children.”The Department of Justice noted that Texas Children’s cooperated with the investigation and took proactive steps that contributed to the resolution. The claims resolved in the settlement remain allegations, with no determination of liability.“I am grateful that Texas Children’s wants to be part of the solution and no longer the problem,” said Brett Shumate, assistant attorney general for the Civil Division.
Read More

Texas Children’s Hospital fined for performing illegal ‘sex-rejecting’ procedures on minors #Catholic The historic settlement agreement between Texas Children’s Hospital, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the state of Texas has been fully executed, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said this week.Under the terms of the settlement agreement, first announced by Paxton’s office in May, Texas Children’s, the largest children’s hospital in the United States, said it would no longer provide “gender-transition” interventions, including puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, to minors, per Texas law.“This historic settlement is a resounding defeat for the radical gender ideology that has preyed on Texas children under the guise of ‘care,’” Paxton said in a press release Aug. 5.Per the executed agreement, Texas Children’s “will pay a total of $10 million to resolve these claims,” with $8,576,000 going to the state of Texas. It will also fund, for five years, a detransition clinic offering free restorative medical care to patients who previously underwent such procedures. The clinic must open by the end of October.“Texas Children’s has agreed to pay millions back to Texas,” Paxton said. “The detransition clinic, which is the first of its kind, must open within months. Activist doctors who harmed children have been fired.”The agreement also required the permanent termination and revocation of privileges for five physicians who performed these interventions.The hospital is permanently barred from rehiring or credentialing the doctors and must implement new compliance measures, including bylaw changes that will automatically revoke privileges for any physician who violates Texas law prohibiting such procedures on children.“This settlement sends an unmistakable message,” Paxton said. “If you put radical ideology over childrenʼs health, my office will go after you. We will continue to lead the way in stopping the far-left’s radical gender agenda.”The settlement agreement resolves a yearslong investigation of the hospital by the DOJ and the state of Texas that began after whistleblower allegations surfaced claiming the hospital had continued performing sex-change procedures on minors in secret even after state lawmakers made such procedures illegal.The Justice Department said in May that the Houston-based hospital had agreed to pay millions in civil penalties and damages for allegedly falsely billing Medicaid and other insurers for “pediatric sex-rejecting procedures.”The federal government had alleged that the hospital violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the False Claims Act, and federal fraud and conspiracy laws.Following the publication of a directive by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott that transgender procedures on minors that could be considered “child abuse” under existing state law, Texas Children’s announced in 2022 that it would cease “sex-change” therapies and procedures, citing concerns that these practices were potentially illegal.In 2023 Texas passed a law that explicitly banned puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and gender-transition surgeries for minors under 18.Nevertheless, at least three doctors associated with Texas Children’s — Richard Roberts, David Paul, and Kristy Rialon — continued to perform “sex-rejecting” procedures on children throughout 2022 and 2023, according to whistleblower evidence published by Christopher Rufo, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute.Rufo claimed that Rialon had been performing surgeries on minors ranging in age from 15 to as young as 1.Calling the settlement “historic,” Paxton said in May that it “will ensure that the deranged child mutilators who hurt our kids are fired and held accountable.”According to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, the DOJ “will use every weapon at its disposal to end the destructive and discredited practice of so-called ‘gender-affirming care’ for children.”The Department of Justice noted that Texas Children’s cooperated with the investigation and took proactive steps that contributed to the resolution. The claims resolved in the settlement remain allegations, with no determination of liability.“I am grateful that Texas Children’s wants to be part of the solution and no longer the problem,” said Brett Shumate, assistant attorney general for the Civil Division.

unitedyam

Texas Children’s will pay $10 million to resolve the claims, with $8,576,000 going to the state of Texas, as well as fund, for five years, a first-of-its kind detransition clinic.

Read More
Federal court hears arguments on Oklahoma’s ban for religious charter schools #Catholic A federal court heard oral arguments on Aug. 5 about whether an Oklahoma law banning religious charter schools violates the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.Oklahoma established a charter school system in 1999, which provides public funds for privately run K–12 schools to which parents can send their children instead of a public school operated by a school district. The law only allows “nonsectarian” applicants, which prevents any participation from schools that have a religious identity.In 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board (SCSB) approved an application from a proposed Catholic charter school — St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School — which led to a legal challenge from Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who opposed religious charter schools.The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided against the school, finding that charter schools are public schools and that public schools must be secular. St. Isidore appealed this to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that resulted in a 4-4 deadlock with no majority opinion because Justice Amy Coney Barrett had a conflict of interest and recused herself.Amid no clear guidance from the federal courts, a Jewish organization — National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation — filed an application to set up a charter school, which was denied. The group, represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund, filed a new lawsuit and asked a federal district court to require the SCSB to consider religious applicants.“Oklahoma makes room in its charter program for schools of all shapes and sizes, from those focused on science and fine arts to language immersion and classical education,” Daniel Chen, a Becket attorney representing the Jewish foundation, said in a statement.“The one it refuses to make room for is a faith-based school,” Chen added. “That is religious discrimination, plain and simple, and the state deserves a failing grade for it.”Chen told EWTN News that Becket is asking the federal court to immediately allow National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation to set up a charter school, citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent that requires government programs to allow religious institutions the same access as secular institutions.“They’re private actors,” he said. “And because they’re private actors, they cannot be excluded from participating in a public benefits program.”Chen said the federal district court is not bound by the precedent of the Oklahoma Supreme Court because that is a state court, so it could rule in favor of the school. He also said if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, he hopes Barrett can weigh in to break the 4-4 deadlock.“We’re hoping that [for] our case, there wouldn’t have to be any recusals,” he said.School board’s hands are tiedAlthough the charter school board denied the application from the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation, one of its lawyers at First Liberty Institute explained to EWTN News that its hands are tied by the statute and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision.“They’re following that order,” said Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty and the lawyer representing SCSB. “But [they] would be happy if the federal court didn’t [require the school board] to engage in that kind of discrimination.”Sasser said the SCSB does not want to exclude an applicant “simply because it’s religious” and would rather evaluate applicants “just based on the merits.” But he said the order “makes them exclude religious schools just because they’re religious.”“They want to maximize all of the various choices and opportunities for parents,” he added.Sasser said he hopes the question goes to the U.S. Supreme Court again so “we’ll get an answer — a real answer.” He said it would provide more clarity for the school board, which “needs an answer.”John Meiser, director of the Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic at the University of Notre Dame and the lawyer who represented St. Isidore at the Supreme Court, told EWTN News that the question ultimately comes down to whether charter schools are private or public institutions.In Oklahoma, he said charter schools “are called public schools” and that label “introduces a confusion that I don’t think would be present if they chose any other word.”He said Supreme Court precedent is clear that religious institutions must have equal access to government programs available to private institutions, but if a charter school is a “government school,” that “doesn’t apply” because the government “doesn’t and can’t run religious schools.”In spite of the label, Meiser said charter schools in Oklahoma are “formed and designed and run by private groups” and people who work there “are private employees.” He said the structure “looks just like a government contract” and funding from the government “doesn’t turn all those private contractors into the government itself.”“The dispute is really just about, ‘Well is a charter school in some way different?’” he said.Although Meiser said he is not aware of any ongoing Catholic efforts to recreate a charter school, he said that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s constitutional arguments for equal access “would presumably apply to all religious operators of schools, and so it would open the door to a Catholic charter school or other religiously based charter school.”Attorney general stands firmDrummond, who remains Oklahoma’s attorney general, is standing firm in opposing the creation of religious charter schools and is fighting against National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s efforts."This matter was resolved when the state Supreme Courtʼs ruling to prevent taxpayer funded religious charter schools was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year,” Leslie Berger, press secretary for the attorney general’s office, told EWTN News.Drummond has also criticized the charter school board in public statements surrounding this legal battle in March, accusing the SCSB of “playing politics with the taxpayers' money” and alleged it “manipulated the record [about why National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s application was rejected] to make that lawsuit easier to lose — not win.”"A state agency that deliberately hobbles its own legal position is not doing its job — it is betraying Oklahoma taxpayers,” he said. “I will not allow that.”Drummond has garnered support from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) for opposing the creation of religious charter schools.Attorneys for FFRF are representing seven Oklahomans who oppose their tax money being used to support religious charter schools.“The federal court should rule according to constitutional principles,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement. “A religious public charter school has no place in our secular public education system.”It’s unclear when the federal court will issue its ruling, but National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation has asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction against the state so it can begin operating a school while the litigation plays out.
Read More

Federal court hears arguments on Oklahoma’s ban for religious charter schools #Catholic A federal court heard oral arguments on Aug. 5 about whether an Oklahoma law banning religious charter schools violates the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.Oklahoma established a charter school system in 1999, which provides public funds for privately run K–12 schools to which parents can send their children instead of a public school operated by a school district. The law only allows “nonsectarian” applicants, which prevents any participation from schools that have a religious identity.In 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board (SCSB) approved an application from a proposed Catholic charter school — St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School — which led to a legal challenge from Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who opposed religious charter schools.The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided against the school, finding that charter schools are public schools and that public schools must be secular. St. Isidore appealed this to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that resulted in a 4-4 deadlock with no majority opinion because Justice Amy Coney Barrett had a conflict of interest and recused herself.Amid no clear guidance from the federal courts, a Jewish organization — National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation — filed an application to set up a charter school, which was denied. The group, represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund, filed a new lawsuit and asked a federal district court to require the SCSB to consider religious applicants.“Oklahoma makes room in its charter program for schools of all shapes and sizes, from those focused on science and fine arts to language immersion and classical education,” Daniel Chen, a Becket attorney representing the Jewish foundation, said in a statement.“The one it refuses to make room for is a faith-based school,” Chen added. “That is religious discrimination, plain and simple, and the state deserves a failing grade for it.”Chen told EWTN News that Becket is asking the federal court to immediately allow National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation to set up a charter school, citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent that requires government programs to allow religious institutions the same access as secular institutions.“They’re private actors,” he said. “And because they’re private actors, they cannot be excluded from participating in a public benefits program.”Chen said the federal district court is not bound by the precedent of the Oklahoma Supreme Court because that is a state court, so it could rule in favor of the school. He also said if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, he hopes Barrett can weigh in to break the 4-4 deadlock.“We’re hoping that [for] our case, there wouldn’t have to be any recusals,” he said.School board’s hands are tiedAlthough the charter school board denied the application from the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation, one of its lawyers at First Liberty Institute explained to EWTN News that its hands are tied by the statute and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision.“They’re following that order,” said Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty and the lawyer representing SCSB. “But [they] would be happy if the federal court didn’t [require the school board] to engage in that kind of discrimination.”Sasser said the SCSB does not want to exclude an applicant “simply because it’s religious” and would rather evaluate applicants “just based on the merits.” But he said the order “makes them exclude religious schools just because they’re religious.”“They want to maximize all of the various choices and opportunities for parents,” he added.Sasser said he hopes the question goes to the U.S. Supreme Court again so “we’ll get an answer — a real answer.” He said it would provide more clarity for the school board, which “needs an answer.”John Meiser, director of the Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic at the University of Notre Dame and the lawyer who represented St. Isidore at the Supreme Court, told EWTN News that the question ultimately comes down to whether charter schools are private or public institutions.In Oklahoma, he said charter schools “are called public schools” and that label “introduces a confusion that I don’t think would be present if they chose any other word.”He said Supreme Court precedent is clear that religious institutions must have equal access to government programs available to private institutions, but if a charter school is a “government school,” that “doesn’t apply” because the government “doesn’t and can’t run religious schools.”In spite of the label, Meiser said charter schools in Oklahoma are “formed and designed and run by private groups” and people who work there “are private employees.” He said the structure “looks just like a government contract” and funding from the government “doesn’t turn all those private contractors into the government itself.”“The dispute is really just about, ‘Well is a charter school in some way different?’” he said.Although Meiser said he is not aware of any ongoing Catholic efforts to recreate a charter school, he said that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s constitutional arguments for equal access “would presumably apply to all religious operators of schools, and so it would open the door to a Catholic charter school or other religiously based charter school.”Attorney general stands firmDrummond, who remains Oklahoma’s attorney general, is standing firm in opposing the creation of religious charter schools and is fighting against National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s efforts."This matter was resolved when the state Supreme Courtʼs ruling to prevent taxpayer funded religious charter schools was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year,” Leslie Berger, press secretary for the attorney general’s office, told EWTN News.Drummond has also criticized the charter school board in public statements surrounding this legal battle in March, accusing the SCSB of “playing politics with the taxpayers' money” and alleged it “manipulated the record [about why National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s application was rejected] to make that lawsuit easier to lose — not win.”"A state agency that deliberately hobbles its own legal position is not doing its job — it is betraying Oklahoma taxpayers,” he said. “I will not allow that.”Drummond has garnered support from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) for opposing the creation of religious charter schools.Attorneys for FFRF are representing seven Oklahomans who oppose their tax money being used to support religious charter schools.“The federal court should rule according to constitutional principles,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement. “A religious public charter school has no place in our secular public education system.”It’s unclear when the federal court will issue its ruling, but National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation has asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction against the state so it can begin operating a school while the litigation plays out.

unitedyam

Oklahoma’s Statewide Charter School Board wants to approve religious charter schools, but a ruling from the Oklahoma Supreme Court and efforts by the state attorney general prevent it from doing so.

Read More
Michigan ends restriction on Catholic counselors who treat kids with gender dysphoria #Catholic Catholic counselors in Michigan who offer Catholic-based “talk therapy” to children who struggle with gender dysphoria and gender identity will be allowed to continue their services, according to a federal court order issued on July 31.Government officials in Michigan have agreed they will not enforce the state ban on "conversion therapy” on the counselors who work for Catholic Charities of Jackson, Lenawee, and Hillsdale Counties or any other counselors engaged in “talk therapy.”The Catholic Charities affiliate sued Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and other state officials after the governor signed into law a ban on “conversion therapy.” This prohibited treatments that seek to “change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity.” This includes “efforts to change behavior or gender expression.”According to the law, counselors were allowed to offer “acceptance, support, or understanding” of a child who self-identifies with a gender inconsistent with his or her sex. The lawsuit filed by the Catholic Charities affiliate argued the law forced them to “affirm” that the child could identify with a gender that is inconsistent with his or her sex, which conflicts with Catholic teaching.The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that “everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity.” The Vatican’s 2019 document “Male and Female He Created Them” teaches that sexual identity is a reality “given” through one’s biological and physiological nature. Officials in Michigan consented to a court order that acknowledges that the law — as enforced against the Catholic Charities affiliate — violates the counselors’ First Amendment right to freedom of speech.According to the court order, the state cannot enforce this law against the Catholic counselors or any other counselors in the state if the treatment “consists exclusively of talking.” The order is permanent and took effect immediately, upon the signature of Judge Jane M. Beckering.The Catholic Charities affiliate was represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund. Luke Goodrich, senior counsel at Becket and lead attorney for the counselors, said in a statement that the order is “a major victory for children, counselors, and common sense.”“Kids who are hurting deserve compassion, not a one-way ticket to harmful drugs, hormones, and surgery,” he said. “Now counselors can offer compassionate counseling without fearing that state bureaucrats will come knocking.”This agreement comes four months after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that a similar ban on “conversion therapy” in Colorado violated the First Amendment rights of counselors, warning the state-level bans “suppress speech based on viewpoint.”Kimberly Bush, a spokesperson for Michigan’s attorney general’s office, said in a statement to EWTN News that Michigan entered into the agreement because of the Supreme Court ruling, but added: “We remain deeply disappointed in this decision and have grave concerns for the implications this could bring for the safety and welfare of Michigan’s children.”A spokesperson for Whitmer also expressed disappointment in the agreement in a statement to EWTN News."Governor Whitmer believes that every young person deserves the right to grow up safe, supported, and free to be themselves,” the spokesperson said.“This order is disappointing and represents a step back for the LGBTQ+ community,” the spokesperson added. “Michigan will never support any practice that harms or shames LGBTQ+ youth. The governor will continue to fight to ensure that LGBTQ+ individuals are protected from attacks and that their voices are heard.”In June, Oregonʼs Board of Licensed Professional Counselors and Therapists withdrew disciplinary action against Catholic counselors who engaged in similar talk therapy, citing the Supreme Court decision as its reason.
Read More

Michigan ends restriction on Catholic counselors who treat kids with gender dysphoria #Catholic Catholic counselors in Michigan who offer Catholic-based “talk therapy” to children who struggle with gender dysphoria and gender identity will be allowed to continue their services, according to a federal court order issued on July 31.Government officials in Michigan have agreed they will not enforce the state ban on "conversion therapy” on the counselors who work for Catholic Charities of Jackson, Lenawee, and Hillsdale Counties or any other counselors engaged in “talk therapy.”The Catholic Charities affiliate sued Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and other state officials after the governor signed into law a ban on “conversion therapy.” This prohibited treatments that seek to “change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity.” This includes “efforts to change behavior or gender expression.”According to the law, counselors were allowed to offer “acceptance, support, or understanding” of a child who self-identifies with a gender inconsistent with his or her sex. The lawsuit filed by the Catholic Charities affiliate argued the law forced them to “affirm” that the child could identify with a gender that is inconsistent with his or her sex, which conflicts with Catholic teaching.The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that “everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity.” The Vatican’s 2019 document “Male and Female He Created Them” teaches that sexual identity is a reality “given” through one’s biological and physiological nature. Officials in Michigan consented to a court order that acknowledges that the law — as enforced against the Catholic Charities affiliate — violates the counselors’ First Amendment right to freedom of speech.According to the court order, the state cannot enforce this law against the Catholic counselors or any other counselors in the state if the treatment “consists exclusively of talking.” The order is permanent and took effect immediately, upon the signature of Judge Jane M. Beckering.The Catholic Charities affiliate was represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund. Luke Goodrich, senior counsel at Becket and lead attorney for the counselors, said in a statement that the order is “a major victory for children, counselors, and common sense.”“Kids who are hurting deserve compassion, not a one-way ticket to harmful drugs, hormones, and surgery,” he said. “Now counselors can offer compassionate counseling without fearing that state bureaucrats will come knocking.”This agreement comes four months after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that a similar ban on “conversion therapy” in Colorado violated the First Amendment rights of counselors, warning the state-level bans “suppress speech based on viewpoint.”Kimberly Bush, a spokesperson for Michigan’s attorney general’s office, said in a statement to EWTN News that Michigan entered into the agreement because of the Supreme Court ruling, but added: “We remain deeply disappointed in this decision and have grave concerns for the implications this could bring for the safety and welfare of Michigan’s children.”A spokesperson for Whitmer also expressed disappointment in the agreement in a statement to EWTN News."Governor Whitmer believes that every young person deserves the right to grow up safe, supported, and free to be themselves,” the spokesperson said.“This order is disappointing and represents a step back for the LGBTQ+ community,” the spokesperson added. “Michigan will never support any practice that harms or shames LGBTQ+ youth. The governor will continue to fight to ensure that LGBTQ+ individuals are protected from attacks and that their voices are heard.”In June, Oregonʼs Board of Licensed Professional Counselors and Therapists withdrew disciplinary action against Catholic counselors who engaged in similar talk therapy, citing the Supreme Court decision as its reason.

unitedyam

A Catholic Charities affiliate sued Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and other state officials after the governor signed into law a ban on “conversion therapy.”

Read More
Priest arrested for alleged child sexual abuse in Mexico City #Catholic The Mexico City attorney generalʼs office announced the arrest of a priest from the Archdiocese of Mexico accused of aggravated child sexual abuse against a 17-year-old girl and stated that a judge has already initiated criminal proceedings against him.TweetIn a statement issued July 15, the attorney general’s office noted that the complaint was filed June 4 by the teenagerʼs mother, who had discovered “conversations with sexual content with a contact identified as ‘Winnie Poo’” on her daughterʼs mobile phone earlier this year.According to the attorney general’s office, the teenager reportedly stated that the contact in question was a priest identified as Enrique “N,” who allegedly “forced her to engage in sexual acts on four occasions.”Following the initial inquiries, a supervisory judge ordered the priest to be held in pretrial detention and set a two-month deadline for the conclusion of the supplementary investigation.Archdiocese initiates canonical investigationThe Archdiocese of Mexico announced in a statement dated July 15 that archbishop Cardinal Carlos Aguiar Retes had ordered the initiation of an investigation “in accordance with canon law and the procedures established by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.”The statement expressed its “support for the minor victim, her family, and anyone who may have been a victim of any form of abuse” and reiterated its commitment to the protection of minors and vulnerable persons, “as well as to providing respectful support to those who have suffered any form of violence.”The archdiocese also noted that while the investigation is ongoing, it “will avoid making premature judgments” and “will refrain from revealing the priest’s identity while the competent authorities carry out the necessary proceedings.”Finally, the archdiocese urged anyone aware of a possible case of sexual abuse committed by an ordained minister to report it either by phone or email and provided the contact information.This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.
Read More

Priest arrested for alleged child sexual abuse in Mexico City #Catholic The Mexico City attorney generalʼs office announced the arrest of a priest from the Archdiocese of Mexico accused of aggravated child sexual abuse against a 17-year-old girl and stated that a judge has already initiated criminal proceedings against him.TweetIn a statement issued July 15, the attorney general’s office noted that the complaint was filed June 4 by the teenagerʼs mother, who had discovered “conversations with sexual content with a contact identified as ‘Winnie Poo’” on her daughterʼs mobile phone earlier this year.According to the attorney general’s office, the teenager reportedly stated that the contact in question was a priest identified as Enrique “N,” who allegedly “forced her to engage in sexual acts on four occasions.”Following the initial inquiries, a supervisory judge ordered the priest to be held in pretrial detention and set a two-month deadline for the conclusion of the supplementary investigation.Archdiocese initiates canonical investigationThe Archdiocese of Mexico announced in a statement dated July 15 that archbishop Cardinal Carlos Aguiar Retes had ordered the initiation of an investigation “in accordance with canon law and the procedures established by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.”The statement expressed its “support for the minor victim, her family, and anyone who may have been a victim of any form of abuse” and reiterated its commitment to the protection of minors and vulnerable persons, “as well as to providing respectful support to those who have suffered any form of violence.”The archdiocese also noted that while the investigation is ongoing, it “will avoid making premature judgments” and “will refrain from revealing the priest’s identity while the competent authorities carry out the necessary proceedings.”Finally, the archdiocese urged anyone aware of a possible case of sexual abuse committed by an ordained minister to report it either by phone or email and provided the contact information.This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.

unitedyam

A priest identified as Enrique “N” has been arrested for alleged sexual abuse of a minor girl based on a preliminary investigation. The Archdiocese of Mexico has initiated a canonical investigation.

Read More
Little Sisters argue contraception mandate case before 3rd Circuit as long fight continues #Catholic Legal counsel for the Little Sisters of the Poor delivered oral arguments to a federal appellate court on July 7 as the Catholic religious society continued its 15-year legal battle over contraception mandates.The dispute goes back to a 2011 federal regulation imposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which requires employers to include coverage of contraception in healthcare plans offered to employees, as part of rules implementing the Affordable Care Act.Although the Little Sisters of the Poor already won two Supreme Court cases — which found the federal government must protect the religious freedom of those who object to contraception and that the federal government has the authority to create exemptions — the attorneys general of Pennsylvania and New Jersey are challenging federal exemptions on grounds that the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on.A lower court ruled in favor of the two states, against the Little Sisters of the Poor, finding that the federal exemptions are arbitrary and capricious. The sisters filed an appeal, which is being considered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.Aimee Thomson, who represented the two states, argued that the broad exemptions — which allow both religious and moral objectors to avoid the mandate — are “arbitrary and capricious” and that the exemptions “swept well beyond all religious employers” who first objected to the mandate.Under the rule, employers who have moral or religious objections can opt in to an accommodation in which the federal government subsidizes contraception coverage in their plans. Employers who also have moral or religious objections to the accommodation can sidestep contraception coverage altogether.She told the panel of judges that the exemption exceeds the scope that is required under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). She said the regulators failed to show that these exemptions were necessary to solve the religious liberty issue and expressed concerns over employers potentially getting exemptions even though their objections are not sincere.Thomson said it’s unclear “how many women have been impacted” by insincere objections, but “expecting female employees” to study policies and litigate an employer’s insincere objections is burdensome.“That is an incredible burden to place on employees and on women,” she said.Mark Rienzi, president of Becket and lead attorney for the Little Sisters, argued that the federal government sought to “choose a middle ground” that created a mandate but protected religious freedom, based on Supreme Court guidance: “Nothing about that is even close to arbitrary and capricious.”“This law is about the federal government … accommodating religion with its own mandate,” he said.Rienzi said a rule does not become arbitrary and capricious just because the scope is “a hair more than what’s required” under RFRA.The Little Sisters of the Poor are also receiving support from the Department of Justice. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Eric McArthur argued on behalf of the federal government, in favor of the exemptions, saying RFRA does not require the exemptions to be the “bare minimum.”He said HHS chose to “set everything aside and take a fresh look at everything” and decided “an exemption was the most appropriate administrative response” to objections. He said this was adopted “as a policy matter … even if RFRA does not compel it.”McArthur argued there is “no good reason” for someone to insincerely request an exemption because the employer can request the accommodation “at zero cost.” Yet, if the court decides the exemptions are too broad, the court could strike down “one line in the rule” rather than “take down the entire rule,” as the two states have requested.Mother Loraine Marie Maguire of the Little Sisters of the Poor said in a statement after the oral arguments that the states’ lawsuit to eliminate the exemptions is threatening their mission to serve the poor and the elderly.“This is our God-given mission,” she said “For nearly 200 years we have welcomed the elderly poor and dying into our homes, and with the population of seniors rapidly growing we cannot allow a government lawsuit to stop us from carrying out our mission. Pennsylvania and New Jersey can keep fighting if they want. All we want is to keep serving.”
Read More

Little Sisters argue contraception mandate case before 3rd Circuit as long fight continues #Catholic Legal counsel for the Little Sisters of the Poor delivered oral arguments to a federal appellate court on July 7 as the Catholic religious society continued its 15-year legal battle over contraception mandates.The dispute goes back to a 2011 federal regulation imposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which requires employers to include coverage of contraception in healthcare plans offered to employees, as part of rules implementing the Affordable Care Act.Although the Little Sisters of the Poor already won two Supreme Court cases — which found the federal government must protect the religious freedom of those who object to contraception and that the federal government has the authority to create exemptions — the attorneys general of Pennsylvania and New Jersey are challenging federal exemptions on grounds that the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on.A lower court ruled in favor of the two states, against the Little Sisters of the Poor, finding that the federal exemptions are arbitrary and capricious. The sisters filed an appeal, which is being considered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.Aimee Thomson, who represented the two states, argued that the broad exemptions — which allow both religious and moral objectors to avoid the mandate — are “arbitrary and capricious” and that the exemptions “swept well beyond all religious employers” who first objected to the mandate.Under the rule, employers who have moral or religious objections can opt in to an accommodation in which the federal government subsidizes contraception coverage in their plans. Employers who also have moral or religious objections to the accommodation can sidestep contraception coverage altogether.She told the panel of judges that the exemption exceeds the scope that is required under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). She said the regulators failed to show that these exemptions were necessary to solve the religious liberty issue and expressed concerns over employers potentially getting exemptions even though their objections are not sincere.Thomson said it’s unclear “how many women have been impacted” by insincere objections, but “expecting female employees” to study policies and litigate an employer’s insincere objections is burdensome.“That is an incredible burden to place on employees and on women,” she said.Mark Rienzi, president of Becket and lead attorney for the Little Sisters, argued that the federal government sought to “choose a middle ground” that created a mandate but protected religious freedom, based on Supreme Court guidance: “Nothing about that is even close to arbitrary and capricious.”“This law is about the federal government … accommodating religion with its own mandate,” he said.Rienzi said a rule does not become arbitrary and capricious just because the scope is “a hair more than what’s required” under RFRA.The Little Sisters of the Poor are also receiving support from the Department of Justice. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Eric McArthur argued on behalf of the federal government, in favor of the exemptions, saying RFRA does not require the exemptions to be the “bare minimum.”He said HHS chose to “set everything aside and take a fresh look at everything” and decided “an exemption was the most appropriate administrative response” to objections. He said this was adopted “as a policy matter … even if RFRA does not compel it.”McArthur argued there is “no good reason” for someone to insincerely request an exemption because the employer can request the accommodation “at zero cost.” Yet, if the court decides the exemptions are too broad, the court could strike down “one line in the rule” rather than “take down the entire rule,” as the two states have requested.Mother Loraine Marie Maguire of the Little Sisters of the Poor said in a statement after the oral arguments that the states’ lawsuit to eliminate the exemptions is threatening their mission to serve the poor and the elderly.“This is our God-given mission,” she said “For nearly 200 years we have welcomed the elderly poor and dying into our homes, and with the population of seniors rapidly growing we cannot allow a government lawsuit to stop us from carrying out our mission. Pennsylvania and New Jersey can keep fighting if they want. All we want is to keep serving.”

unitedyam

The dispute stems from a 2011 federal rule requiring employers to include contraception coverage in employee health plans under the Affordable Care Act.

Read More
Pope Leo XIV accepts Constitution Center’s 2026 Liberty Medal: ‘I am honored’ #Catholic PHILADELPHIA — Pope Leo XIV said he was “honored” to accept the 2026 Liberty Medal from the National Constitution Center (NCC) in livestreamed remarks delivered for the ceremony in Philadelphia on July 3.“I am honored to accept the Liberty Medal of the National Constitution Center in this year that marks the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States of America with the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776,” the Holy Father said.Leo was born in Chicago but earned a bachelor’s degree at Villanova University in the Philadelphia suburbs. The NCC presented the award to the pontiff in person at the Vatican on April 30, ahead of the ceremony.In his remarks, Leo thanked those gathered in Philadelphia for the occasion. The NCC building overlooks the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall, where the country’s founders developed and adopted the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.“As a son of this great country, founded by courageous men and women who dreamed of liberty and of a better life for themselves and for their children, I join you in asking God’s blessings upon America’s future, that the lofty ideals enshrined at the beginning of the Declaration of Independence may continue to guide the flourishing of the nation in unity, justice, and peace,” Leo said.“From our youth, most of us have admired the eloquence of those words, with their resounding appeal to the law of nature and to nature’s God as the basis of their assertion that all men and women are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, including the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” he said.The pontiff said that although the text employed “the language of the Enlightenment,” the claim is “ultimately grounded in an understanding of the human person inspired by the great biblical vision of man and woman being created in the divine image.”“It is indeed here that we discover the basis of human dignity; dignity which precedes the establishment of any state and whose custody constitutes its very purpose,” Leo said. Pope Leo XIV watches the livestreamed ceremony between the Vatican and the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia on July 3, 2026. | Credit: Vatican Media Respecting the right to life “in every form and condition,” he said, is directly tied to the nation’s vitality. He said society must cultivate a reverence for life that “sways the hearts of individuals and inspires laws that recognize and safeguard this gift from the moment of conception to natural death.”The right to liberty, the pontiff said, is much deeper than simply doing what one wants. It is “founded upon the human person’s capacity to know the truth and adhere to what is good, even at great cost — a sacrifice well known to many who have labored to shape this country,” he said.“The desire for truth and freedom, as well as the very pursuit of happiness, continues to inspire people of all generations to ask fundamental questions regarding the meaning of life, our ultimate purpose, and indeed about God, and it is proper for magnanimous hearts to endeavor to answer these questions with sincerity,” Leo said.The Holy Father said that religious freedom, to be “free from fear and coercion, as enshrined in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution,” is needed to answer those questions.“It is my hope that this tradition will continue to bear fruit in a public discourse marked by moderation, respect for the views of others, and an ongoing effort to find common ground in promoting the cause of peace and reconciliation, at home and abroad,” he added.The pope said he is praying that the 250th anniversary of the United States “may be the occasion of a solemn recommitment to these ideals that have made America a country that values peace and prosperity, a country characterized by generosity and nobility of heart.”Archbishop Perez, Gov. Shapiro speakThe ceremony was attended by a few hundred guests and included other speakers, such as Philadelphia Archbishop Nelson J. Perez, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, state Attorney General Dave Sunday, Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle L. Parker, and local Christian, Muslim, and Jewish religious leaders.Perez said throughout Leo’s life — as priest, bishop, cardinal, and pope — he has defended the “inherent dignity of all people and building pathways to peace,” including a defense of religious freedom.“True freedom stems from defending dignity and the value of every human being,” he said.Perez told EWTN News following the event that the pope’s words “bring us back to our origins” as Americans regarding the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.“It was wonderful to hear him once again bring us back to center, that we all were created in a very image and likeness of God,” the archbishop said. “Our human dignity and our rights flow from that. They flow from being created in Godʼs image and likeness and from there flows our freedom and the heart that seeks God.”“Itʼs a wonderful day for Philadelphia,” Perez said. “Itʼs a wonderful day for the country. Itʼs a wonderful day for the world.”Shapiro congratulated the pope on receiving the award and thanked the Holy Father, on behalf of Pennsylvania, “for using your voice, your power, to advance religious liberty for all people.”The ceremony included the ringing of a replica of the Liberty Bell just outside the building. It was rung by Sunday, the attorney general, who recalled the words of Benjamin Franklin when the Founding Father was asked what form of government they had created after the constitutional convention: “A republic, if you can keep it.”“Our Constitution is the rock upon which we will build in the next 250 years,” Sunday said.
Read More

Pope Leo XIV accepts Constitution Center’s 2026 Liberty Medal: ‘I am honored’ #Catholic PHILADELPHIA — Pope Leo XIV said he was “honored” to accept the 2026 Liberty Medal from the National Constitution Center (NCC) in livestreamed remarks delivered for the ceremony in Philadelphia on July 3.“I am honored to accept the Liberty Medal of the National Constitution Center in this year that marks the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States of America with the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776,” the Holy Father said.Leo was born in Chicago but earned a bachelor’s degree at Villanova University in the Philadelphia suburbs. The NCC presented the award to the pontiff in person at the Vatican on April 30, ahead of the ceremony.In his remarks, Leo thanked those gathered in Philadelphia for the occasion. The NCC building overlooks the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall, where the country’s founders developed and adopted the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.“As a son of this great country, founded by courageous men and women who dreamed of liberty and of a better life for themselves and for their children, I join you in asking God’s blessings upon America’s future, that the lofty ideals enshrined at the beginning of the Declaration of Independence may continue to guide the flourishing of the nation in unity, justice, and peace,” Leo said.“From our youth, most of us have admired the eloquence of those words, with their resounding appeal to the law of nature and to nature’s God as the basis of their assertion that all men and women are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, including the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” he said.The pontiff said that although the text employed “the language of the Enlightenment,” the claim is “ultimately grounded in an understanding of the human person inspired by the great biblical vision of man and woman being created in the divine image.”“It is indeed here that we discover the basis of human dignity; dignity which precedes the establishment of any state and whose custody constitutes its very purpose,” Leo said. Pope Leo XIV watches the livestreamed ceremony between the Vatican and the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia on July 3, 2026. | Credit: Vatican Media Respecting the right to life “in every form and condition,” he said, is directly tied to the nation’s vitality. He said society must cultivate a reverence for life that “sways the hearts of individuals and inspires laws that recognize and safeguard this gift from the moment of conception to natural death.”The right to liberty, the pontiff said, is much deeper than simply doing what one wants. It is “founded upon the human person’s capacity to know the truth and adhere to what is good, even at great cost — a sacrifice well known to many who have labored to shape this country,” he said.“The desire for truth and freedom, as well as the very pursuit of happiness, continues to inspire people of all generations to ask fundamental questions regarding the meaning of life, our ultimate purpose, and indeed about God, and it is proper for magnanimous hearts to endeavor to answer these questions with sincerity,” Leo said.The Holy Father said that religious freedom, to be “free from fear and coercion, as enshrined in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution,” is needed to answer those questions.“It is my hope that this tradition will continue to bear fruit in a public discourse marked by moderation, respect for the views of others, and an ongoing effort to find common ground in promoting the cause of peace and reconciliation, at home and abroad,” he added.The pope said he is praying that the 250th anniversary of the United States “may be the occasion of a solemn recommitment to these ideals that have made America a country that values peace and prosperity, a country characterized by generosity and nobility of heart.”Archbishop Perez, Gov. Shapiro speakThe ceremony was attended by a few hundred guests and included other speakers, such as Philadelphia Archbishop Nelson J. Perez, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, state Attorney General Dave Sunday, Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle L. Parker, and local Christian, Muslim, and Jewish religious leaders.Perez said throughout Leo’s life — as priest, bishop, cardinal, and pope — he has defended the “inherent dignity of all people and building pathways to peace,” including a defense of religious freedom.“True freedom stems from defending dignity and the value of every human being,” he said.Perez told EWTN News following the event that the pope’s words “bring us back to our origins” as Americans regarding the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.“It was wonderful to hear him once again bring us back to center, that we all were created in a very image and likeness of God,” the archbishop said. “Our human dignity and our rights flow from that. They flow from being created in Godʼs image and likeness and from there flows our freedom and the heart that seeks God.”“Itʼs a wonderful day for Philadelphia,” Perez said. “Itʼs a wonderful day for the country. Itʼs a wonderful day for the world.”Shapiro congratulated the pope on receiving the award and thanked the Holy Father, on behalf of Pennsylvania, “for using your voice, your power, to advance religious liberty for all people.”The ceremony included the ringing of a replica of the Liberty Bell just outside the building. It was rung by Sunday, the attorney general, who recalled the words of Benjamin Franklin when the Founding Father was asked what form of government they had created after the constitutional convention: “A republic, if you can keep it.”“Our Constitution is the rock upon which we will build in the next 250 years,” Sunday said.

unitedyam

The pope delivered livestreamed remarks, praising the values enshrined in the Declaration of Independence: the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Read More