![Nationwide tax-funded abortion is top priority for Democrats in next session #Catholic The Democratic Party will head into the 2027 legislative session with majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate following a landslide victory in the midterm elections, and one of its focuses will be to advance pro-abortion legislation.Earlier this year, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries promised healthcare would be one of the top Democratic priorities for 2027 and created a Cost-of-Living Healthcare Working Group to develop a legislative plan, led by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, and Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Alabama.Based on a memo developed by the working group and obtained by Politico in late September, Democratic plans to codify the now-defunct Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, which made abortion legal nationwide, and plans for tax-funded elective abortions, “should be considered for advancement in the first 100 hours” of the legislative session.“Reestablish a federal right to abortion care and end restrictions that prevent people covered through federal health programs from receiving abortion coverage,” read the memo, which is dated Sept. 1 and was published by Politico on Sept. 25.EWTN News reached out to Ocasio-Cortez’s office and Sewell’s office to ask whether this is still the plan but did not receive a response by the time of publication.The White House provided a statement to EWTN News when asked about Democrats’ plans to prioritize abortion legislation but did not specifically say whether President Donald Trump would veto any pro-abortion bills.“The Trump Administration is committed to Gold Standard Science, as outlined in detail by President Trump’s Executive Order, ‘Restoring Gold Standard Science,’” White House spokeswoman Allison Schuster said in the statement. “The mifepristone safety review by the FDA is just one example of President Trumpʼs total commitment to ensuring the health and safety of all Americans.”2 bills for immediate considerationOne bill the working group suggests Democrats consider to advance in the first 100 hours is the Women’s Health Protection Act, which was first introduced in 2013 to codify Roe. This bill would declare abortion “a human right” and prevent state governments from restricting abortion before fetal viability, which is typically in the 23rd or 24th week of pregnancy.According to the 2025 version of the bill, viability is when the unborn child can survive outside of the womb. Whether the unborn child is viable would be determined by “the treating health care provider,” who is typically the abortionist.Although some post-viability abortion restrictions would be allowed, all state laws would need to allow abortion through the ninth month of pregnancy if “the treating health care provider,” who is typically the abortionist, deems it necessary to protect “the life or health of the patient.” The text is unclear as to what qualifies as a threat to the patient’s health.If this bill were to become law, it would immediately invalidate state-level pro-life laws across the country.“It would sweep aside state protections for unborn children,” Laura Echevarria, communications director National Right to Life, told EWTN News.She said the bill would “take away the ability for [people’s] elected representatives … [to] protect babies before viability.” And after viability, she said abortions would be allowed “if the abortionist determines the abortion is necessary.”Echevarria said the text used in the bill offers a “very broad definition” for the health exemption and warned that it could include not just physical health complications but also mental health complications, as determined by the abortionist.The second bill the working group suggests Democrats consider within the first 100 hours is the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance (EACH) Act, which would add abortion coverage to tax-funded health insurance plans for government workers and people enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, and the Childrenʼs Health Insurance Program (CHIP).Essentially, the bill would eliminate the Hyde Amendment, which has been included in spending bills since 1976 to prohibit federal funds for elective abortions. Although the ban on tax-funded abortion originally had bipartisan support, Democrats have sought to eliminate the ban in recent years.Echevarria said the EACH Act would “require abortion coverage across specific government health programs,” with the goal being to eliminate Hyde. She said: “The federal government would ensure that abortion would be covered, so it’s very broad and very sweeping.”She said the Democrats’ plan to prioritize these bills is “disappointing” but “not surprising.” She said that although the Democratic Party used to welcome pro-life voices, “now it’s the party that encourages women to ‘shout their abortion.’”“It used to be we had more pro-life Democrats in the House years ago, [but] the Democratic Party has not welcomed pro-lifers in years,” Echevarria said. “So they are not welcoming that viewpoint.”Kelsey Pritchard, the communications director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in a statement to EWTN News that this agenda shows “pro-abortion Democrat extremism will be on full display next Congress.”In addition to the two bills included in the memo, Pritchard said: “We also anticipate efforts to revive the expansion of Obamacare subsidies that further taxpayer funded abortion coverage, another avenue for more babies to die at the hands of the federal government.”The incoming members of Congress will be sworn in at noon on Jan. 3, 2027. Although not all of the results are finalized, Democrats will have at least 253 seats in the House and at least 54 seats in the Senate. Nationwide tax-funded abortion is top priority for Democrats in next session #Catholic The Democratic Party will head into the 2027 legislative session with majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate following a landslide victory in the midterm elections, and one of its focuses will be to advance pro-abortion legislation.Earlier this year, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries promised healthcare would be one of the top Democratic priorities for 2027 and created a Cost-of-Living Healthcare Working Group to develop a legislative plan, led by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, and Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Alabama.Based on a memo developed by the working group and obtained by Politico in late September, Democratic plans to codify the now-defunct Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, which made abortion legal nationwide, and plans for tax-funded elective abortions, “should be considered for advancement in the first 100 hours” of the legislative session.“Reestablish a federal right to abortion care and end restrictions that prevent people covered through federal health programs from receiving abortion coverage,” read the memo, which is dated Sept. 1 and was published by Politico on Sept. 25.EWTN News reached out to Ocasio-Cortez’s office and Sewell’s office to ask whether this is still the plan but did not receive a response by the time of publication.The White House provided a statement to EWTN News when asked about Democrats’ plans to prioritize abortion legislation but did not specifically say whether President Donald Trump would veto any pro-abortion bills.“The Trump Administration is committed to Gold Standard Science, as outlined in detail by President Trump’s Executive Order, ‘Restoring Gold Standard Science,’” White House spokeswoman Allison Schuster said in the statement. “The mifepristone safety review by the FDA is just one example of President Trumpʼs total commitment to ensuring the health and safety of all Americans.”2 bills for immediate considerationOne bill the working group suggests Democrats consider to advance in the first 100 hours is the Women’s Health Protection Act, which was first introduced in 2013 to codify Roe. This bill would declare abortion “a human right” and prevent state governments from restricting abortion before fetal viability, which is typically in the 23rd or 24th week of pregnancy.According to the 2025 version of the bill, viability is when the unborn child can survive outside of the womb. Whether the unborn child is viable would be determined by “the treating health care provider,” who is typically the abortionist.Although some post-viability abortion restrictions would be allowed, all state laws would need to allow abortion through the ninth month of pregnancy if “the treating health care provider,” who is typically the abortionist, deems it necessary to protect “the life or health of the patient.” The text is unclear as to what qualifies as a threat to the patient’s health.If this bill were to become law, it would immediately invalidate state-level pro-life laws across the country.“It would sweep aside state protections for unborn children,” Laura Echevarria, communications director National Right to Life, told EWTN News.She said the bill would “take away the ability for [people’s] elected representatives … [to] protect babies before viability.” And after viability, she said abortions would be allowed “if the abortionist determines the abortion is necessary.”Echevarria said the text used in the bill offers a “very broad definition” for the health exemption and warned that it could include not just physical health complications but also mental health complications, as determined by the abortionist.The second bill the working group suggests Democrats consider within the first 100 hours is the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance (EACH) Act, which would add abortion coverage to tax-funded health insurance plans for government workers and people enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, and the Childrenʼs Health Insurance Program (CHIP).Essentially, the bill would eliminate the Hyde Amendment, which has been included in spending bills since 1976 to prohibit federal funds for elective abortions. Although the ban on tax-funded abortion originally had bipartisan support, Democrats have sought to eliminate the ban in recent years.Echevarria said the EACH Act would “require abortion coverage across specific government health programs,” with the goal being to eliminate Hyde. She said: “The federal government would ensure that abortion would be covered, so it’s very broad and very sweeping.”She said the Democrats’ plan to prioritize these bills is “disappointing” but “not surprising.” She said that although the Democratic Party used to welcome pro-life voices, “now it’s the party that encourages women to ‘shout their abortion.’”“It used to be we had more pro-life Democrats in the House years ago, [but] the Democratic Party has not welcomed pro-lifers in years,” Echevarria said. “So they are not welcoming that viewpoint.”Kelsey Pritchard, the communications director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in a statement to EWTN News that this agenda shows “pro-abortion Democrat extremism will be on full display next Congress.”In addition to the two bills included in the memo, Pritchard said: “We also anticipate efforts to revive the expansion of Obamacare subsidies that further taxpayer funded abortion coverage, another avenue for more babies to die at the hands of the federal government.”The incoming members of Congress will be sworn in at noon on Jan. 3, 2027. Although not all of the results are finalized, Democrats will have at least 253 seats in the House and at least 54 seats in the Senate.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/11/nationwide-tax-funded-abortion-is-top-priority-for-democrats-in-next-session-catholic-the-democratic-party-will-head-into-the-2027-legislative-session-with-majorities-in-the-house-of-representatives.png)
Democrats are considering two abortion-related bills for the first 100 hours of the 2027 legislative session: one to legalize abortion nationwide and one to allow federal tax funds for abortion.

![Nationwide tax-funded abortion is top priority for Democrats in next session #Catholic The Democratic Party will head into the 2027 legislative session with majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate following a landslide victory in the midterm elections, and one of its focuses will be to advance pro-abortion legislation.Earlier this year, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries promised healthcare would be one of the top Democratic priorities for 2027 and created a Cost-of-Living Healthcare Working Group to develop a legislative plan, led by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, and Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Alabama.Based on a memo developed by the working group and obtained by Politico in late September, Democratic plans to codify the now-defunct Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, which made abortion legal nationwide, and plans for tax-funded elective abortions, “should be considered for advancement in the first 100 hours” of the legislative session.“Reestablish a federal right to abortion care and end restrictions that prevent people covered through federal health programs from receiving abortion coverage,” read the memo, which is dated Sept. 1 and was published by Politico on Sept. 25.EWTN News reached out to Ocasio-Cortez’s office and Sewell’s office to ask whether this is still the plan but did not receive a response by the time of publication.The White House provided a statement to EWTN News when asked about Democrats’ plans to prioritize abortion legislation but did not specifically say whether President Donald Trump would veto any pro-abortion bills.“The Trump Administration is committed to Gold Standard Science, as outlined in detail by President Trump’s Executive Order, ‘Restoring Gold Standard Science,’” White House spokeswoman Allison Schuster said in the statement. “The mifepristone safety review by the FDA is just one example of President Trumpʼs total commitment to ensuring the health and safety of all Americans.”2 bills for immediate considerationOne bill the working group suggests Democrats consider to advance in the first 100 hours is the Women’s Health Protection Act, which was first introduced in 2013 to codify Roe. This bill would declare abortion “a human right” and prevent state governments from restricting abortion before fetal viability, which is typically in the 23rd or 24th week of pregnancy.According to the 2025 version of the bill, viability is when the unborn child can survive outside of the womb. Whether the unborn child is viable would be determined by “the treating health care provider,” who is typically the abortionist.Although some post-viability abortion restrictions would be allowed, all state laws would need to allow abortion through the ninth month of pregnancy if “the treating health care provider,” who is typically the abortionist, deems it necessary to protect “the life or health of the patient.” The text is unclear as to what qualifies as a threat to the patient’s health.If this bill were to become law, it would immediately invalidate state-level pro-life laws across the country.“It would sweep aside state protections for unborn children,” Laura Echevarria, communications director National Right to Life, told EWTN News.She said the bill would “take away the ability for [people’s] elected representatives … [to] protect babies before viability.” And after viability, she said abortions would be allowed “if the abortionist determines the abortion is necessary.”Echevarria said the text used in the bill offers a “very broad definition” for the health exemption and warned that it could include not just physical health complications but also mental health complications, as determined by the abortionist.The second bill the working group suggests Democrats consider within the first 100 hours is the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance (EACH) Act, which would add abortion coverage to tax-funded health insurance plans for government workers and people enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, and the Childrenʼs Health Insurance Program (CHIP).Essentially, the bill would eliminate the Hyde Amendment, which has been included in spending bills since 1976 to prohibit federal funds for elective abortions. Although the ban on tax-funded abortion originally had bipartisan support, Democrats have sought to eliminate the ban in recent years.Echevarria said the EACH Act would “require abortion coverage across specific government health programs,” with the goal being to eliminate Hyde. She said: “The federal government would ensure that abortion would be covered, so it’s very broad and very sweeping.”She said the Democrats’ plan to prioritize these bills is “disappointing” but “not surprising.” She said that although the Democratic Party used to welcome pro-life voices, “now it’s the party that encourages women to ‘shout their abortion.’”“It used to be we had more pro-life Democrats in the House years ago, [but] the Democratic Party has not welcomed pro-lifers in years,” Echevarria said. “So they are not welcoming that viewpoint.”Kelsey Pritchard, the communications director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in a statement to EWTN News that this agenda shows “pro-abortion Democrat extremism will be on full display next Congress.”In addition to the two bills included in the memo, Pritchard said: “We also anticipate efforts to revive the expansion of Obamacare subsidies that further taxpayer funded abortion coverage, another avenue for more babies to die at the hands of the federal government.”The incoming members of Congress will be sworn in at noon on Jan. 3, 2027. Although not all of the results are finalized, Democrats will have at least 253 seats in the House and at least 54 seats in the Senate. Nationwide tax-funded abortion is top priority for Democrats in next session #Catholic The Democratic Party will head into the 2027 legislative session with majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate following a landslide victory in the midterm elections, and one of its focuses will be to advance pro-abortion legislation.Earlier this year, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries promised healthcare would be one of the top Democratic priorities for 2027 and created a Cost-of-Living Healthcare Working Group to develop a legislative plan, led by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, and Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Alabama.Based on a memo developed by the working group and obtained by Politico in late September, Democratic plans to codify the now-defunct Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, which made abortion legal nationwide, and plans for tax-funded elective abortions, “should be considered for advancement in the first 100 hours” of the legislative session.“Reestablish a federal right to abortion care and end restrictions that prevent people covered through federal health programs from receiving abortion coverage,” read the memo, which is dated Sept. 1 and was published by Politico on Sept. 25.EWTN News reached out to Ocasio-Cortez’s office and Sewell’s office to ask whether this is still the plan but did not receive a response by the time of publication.The White House provided a statement to EWTN News when asked about Democrats’ plans to prioritize abortion legislation but did not specifically say whether President Donald Trump would veto any pro-abortion bills.“The Trump Administration is committed to Gold Standard Science, as outlined in detail by President Trump’s Executive Order, ‘Restoring Gold Standard Science,’” White House spokeswoman Allison Schuster said in the statement. “The mifepristone safety review by the FDA is just one example of President Trumpʼs total commitment to ensuring the health and safety of all Americans.”2 bills for immediate considerationOne bill the working group suggests Democrats consider to advance in the first 100 hours is the Women’s Health Protection Act, which was first introduced in 2013 to codify Roe. This bill would declare abortion “a human right” and prevent state governments from restricting abortion before fetal viability, which is typically in the 23rd or 24th week of pregnancy.According to the 2025 version of the bill, viability is when the unborn child can survive outside of the womb. Whether the unborn child is viable would be determined by “the treating health care provider,” who is typically the abortionist.Although some post-viability abortion restrictions would be allowed, all state laws would need to allow abortion through the ninth month of pregnancy if “the treating health care provider,” who is typically the abortionist, deems it necessary to protect “the life or health of the patient.” The text is unclear as to what qualifies as a threat to the patient’s health.If this bill were to become law, it would immediately invalidate state-level pro-life laws across the country.“It would sweep aside state protections for unborn children,” Laura Echevarria, communications director National Right to Life, told EWTN News.She said the bill would “take away the ability for [people’s] elected representatives … [to] protect babies before viability.” And after viability, she said abortions would be allowed “if the abortionist determines the abortion is necessary.”Echevarria said the text used in the bill offers a “very broad definition” for the health exemption and warned that it could include not just physical health complications but also mental health complications, as determined by the abortionist.The second bill the working group suggests Democrats consider within the first 100 hours is the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance (EACH) Act, which would add abortion coverage to tax-funded health insurance plans for government workers and people enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, and the Childrenʼs Health Insurance Program (CHIP).Essentially, the bill would eliminate the Hyde Amendment, which has been included in spending bills since 1976 to prohibit federal funds for elective abortions. Although the ban on tax-funded abortion originally had bipartisan support, Democrats have sought to eliminate the ban in recent years.Echevarria said the EACH Act would “require abortion coverage across specific government health programs,” with the goal being to eliminate Hyde. She said: “The federal government would ensure that abortion would be covered, so it’s very broad and very sweeping.”She said the Democrats’ plan to prioritize these bills is “disappointing” but “not surprising.” She said that although the Democratic Party used to welcome pro-life voices, “now it’s the party that encourages women to ‘shout their abortion.’”“It used to be we had more pro-life Democrats in the House years ago, [but] the Democratic Party has not welcomed pro-lifers in years,” Echevarria said. “So they are not welcoming that viewpoint.”Kelsey Pritchard, the communications director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in a statement to EWTN News that this agenda shows “pro-abortion Democrat extremism will be on full display next Congress.”In addition to the two bills included in the memo, Pritchard said: “We also anticipate efforts to revive the expansion of Obamacare subsidies that further taxpayer funded abortion coverage, another avenue for more babies to die at the hands of the federal government.”The incoming members of Congress will be sworn in at noon on Jan. 3, 2027. Although not all of the results are finalized, Democrats will have at least 253 seats in the House and at least 54 seats in the Senate.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/11/nationwide-tax-funded-abortion-is-top-priority-for-democrats-in-next-session-catholic-the-democratic-party-will-head-into-the-2027-legislative-session-with-majorities-in-the-house-of-representatives.png)
Democrats are considering two abortion-related bills for the first 100 hours of the 2027 legislative session: one to legalize abortion nationwide and one to allow federal tax funds for abortion.


A referendum to establish a constitutional right to abortion in the Virginia constitution was adopted. Abortion-related referendums in three other states are too early to call.

![U.S. Supreme Court leans toward Catholic schools in clash over pre-K funding #Catholic A majority of U.S. Supreme Court justices sounded ready to require that Colorado provide Catholic schools government funding for preschool even if the schools refuse to guarantee admission for children of same-sex couples, during oral arguments Tuesday in a case involving a school in the Archdiocese of Denver.The case, St. Mary School v. Roy, centers on a preschool-through-grade-8 Catholic school in Littleton that wants to participate in the state’s universal preschool program.Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a member of the court’s conservative majority, described the case as a clash between the free exercise of religion and the right to same-sex marriage the court found in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015. But he suggested the clash is unnecessary because parents in Colorado have so many options for prekindergarten, since there are more than 2,000 providers in the state, while the Archdiocese of Denver has only 34 schools that provide the service.“Why has this been provoked when there’s an ability for everyone to go to the school, a good school, that’s a fit for them, and to respect religious rights?” he asked.Helen Norton, deputy solicitor general for the state of Colorado, said parents often choose prekindergarten programs based on their location and their hours rather than their curriculum.“Colorado has an interest in ensuring that its public funds go to schools that ensure equal opportunity — not some opportunity, that ensure equal opportunity to public-funded options, regardless of protected-class status,” Norton said, replying to Kavanaugh’s question. “Families are harmed when they’re turned away from the publicly funded school that makes their lives work because of their protected-class status.”‘Creating a Catholic community’In 2020, Colorado voters approved a state-funded universal prekindergarten program, using increases in tobacco-related taxes to pay for it. The state government is planning to spend about $360 million for the program during the 2026-2027 school year. The state pays preschool providers about $6,100 per year for 15 hours a week of instruction for 4-year-olds during the 2026-2027 school year, according to state standards.Catholic schools want to participate in the program, but the Archdiocese of Denver objects to a state mandate concerning admissions.A Colorado state statute requires that preschools participating in the funding program provide children “an equal opportunity to enroll and receive preschool services” regardless of eight protected classes — including “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” — “as such characteristics and circumstances apply to the child or the child’s family.”A lawyer for the Catholic schools told justices Tuesday that Church and school officials want to make admissions decisions on a case-by-case basis in alignment with Catholic teachings instead of simply allowing all comers because of a state mandate.“I think it’s their thoughtful attempt to say, ‘We’re creating a Catholic community,’” said Nicholas Reaves, senior counsel for the Becket law group, which is representing the Catholic schools.Reaves got hostile questions from the court’s three liberals (Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson) and either friendly or neutral questions from the court’s five conservatives (Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett), which suggests how the decision might ultimately go. (The chief justice, John Roberts, often seen as a swing vote, mostly moderated the discussion.)Sarah Harris, principal deputy solicitor general in the Trump administration, also argued on the Catholic schools’ side during oral presentations Tuesday.Many optionsThe history of Catholic schools in the 19th century came up during oral arguments, including their origin in concerns among Catholic clerics and parents that government-run public schools were providing a Protestant point of view to the exclusion of Catholicism. Kavanaugh, a Catholic, at one point asked the lawyer for the state of Colorado about a moment in the trial record when the administrator of the state’s universal prekindergarten program was asked about Catholic history.“The director of the program, by all accounts a dutiful public servant, … was asked at the trial, ‘Are you aware that Catholics have historically been discriminated against?’ And she answered, ‘No,’” Kavanaugh said. “I was surprised by that answer and curious if that’s Colorado’s position.”“Not at all, Your Honor,” Norton replied. “And it’s Colorado’s position that the equal-opportunity requirements help religious families. They ensure that Catholic families are not turned away from the UPK [universal prekindergarten] school that best meets their needs because of their faith or because of any other protected characteristic. And a history of discrimination against Catholics is among the reasons that requirement is so important.”Some legal observers have suggested that a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court may use the Colorado case as a vehicle to overturn the Smith decision in 1990, which, although written by the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, is disliked by many religious-liberty advocates who argue it doesn’t respect free-exercise rights enough.Yet the lawyer representing the Catholic schools on Tuesday offered narrower grounds for the justices to overturn Colorado’s admissions requirements, noting that for every Catholic preschool program in the Archdiocese of Denver, there are two universal prekindergarten programs already in the state’s program within three miles of it.Said Reaves: “This is just not really a problem in real life.”This story was first published by the National Catholic Register, the sister partner of EWTN News, and has been adapted by EWTN News. U.S. Supreme Court leans toward Catholic schools in clash over pre-K funding #Catholic A majority of U.S. Supreme Court justices sounded ready to require that Colorado provide Catholic schools government funding for preschool even if the schools refuse to guarantee admission for children of same-sex couples, during oral arguments Tuesday in a case involving a school in the Archdiocese of Denver.The case, St. Mary School v. Roy, centers on a preschool-through-grade-8 Catholic school in Littleton that wants to participate in the state’s universal preschool program.Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a member of the court’s conservative majority, described the case as a clash between the free exercise of religion and the right to same-sex marriage the court found in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015. But he suggested the clash is unnecessary because parents in Colorado have so many options for prekindergarten, since there are more than 2,000 providers in the state, while the Archdiocese of Denver has only 34 schools that provide the service.“Why has this been provoked when there’s an ability for everyone to go to the school, a good school, that’s a fit for them, and to respect religious rights?” he asked.Helen Norton, deputy solicitor general for the state of Colorado, said parents often choose prekindergarten programs based on their location and their hours rather than their curriculum.“Colorado has an interest in ensuring that its public funds go to schools that ensure equal opportunity — not some opportunity, that ensure equal opportunity to public-funded options, regardless of protected-class status,” Norton said, replying to Kavanaugh’s question. “Families are harmed when they’re turned away from the publicly funded school that makes their lives work because of their protected-class status.”‘Creating a Catholic community’In 2020, Colorado voters approved a state-funded universal prekindergarten program, using increases in tobacco-related taxes to pay for it. The state government is planning to spend about $360 million for the program during the 2026-2027 school year. The state pays preschool providers about $6,100 per year for 15 hours a week of instruction for 4-year-olds during the 2026-2027 school year, according to state standards.Catholic schools want to participate in the program, but the Archdiocese of Denver objects to a state mandate concerning admissions.A Colorado state statute requires that preschools participating in the funding program provide children “an equal opportunity to enroll and receive preschool services” regardless of eight protected classes — including “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” — “as such characteristics and circumstances apply to the child or the child’s family.”A lawyer for the Catholic schools told justices Tuesday that Church and school officials want to make admissions decisions on a case-by-case basis in alignment with Catholic teachings instead of simply allowing all comers because of a state mandate.“I think it’s their thoughtful attempt to say, ‘We’re creating a Catholic community,’” said Nicholas Reaves, senior counsel for the Becket law group, which is representing the Catholic schools.Reaves got hostile questions from the court’s three liberals (Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson) and either friendly or neutral questions from the court’s five conservatives (Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett), which suggests how the decision might ultimately go. (The chief justice, John Roberts, often seen as a swing vote, mostly moderated the discussion.)Sarah Harris, principal deputy solicitor general in the Trump administration, also argued on the Catholic schools’ side during oral presentations Tuesday.Many optionsThe history of Catholic schools in the 19th century came up during oral arguments, including their origin in concerns among Catholic clerics and parents that government-run public schools were providing a Protestant point of view to the exclusion of Catholicism. Kavanaugh, a Catholic, at one point asked the lawyer for the state of Colorado about a moment in the trial record when the administrator of the state’s universal prekindergarten program was asked about Catholic history.“The director of the program, by all accounts a dutiful public servant, … was asked at the trial, ‘Are you aware that Catholics have historically been discriminated against?’ And she answered, ‘No,’” Kavanaugh said. “I was surprised by that answer and curious if that’s Colorado’s position.”“Not at all, Your Honor,” Norton replied. “And it’s Colorado’s position that the equal-opportunity requirements help religious families. They ensure that Catholic families are not turned away from the UPK [universal prekindergarten] school that best meets their needs because of their faith or because of any other protected characteristic. And a history of discrimination against Catholics is among the reasons that requirement is so important.”Some legal observers have suggested that a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court may use the Colorado case as a vehicle to overturn the Smith decision in 1990, which, although written by the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, is disliked by many religious-liberty advocates who argue it doesn’t respect free-exercise rights enough.Yet the lawyer representing the Catholic schools on Tuesday offered narrower grounds for the justices to overturn Colorado’s admissions requirements, noting that for every Catholic preschool program in the Archdiocese of Denver, there are two universal prekindergarten programs already in the state’s program within three miles of it.Said Reaves: “This is just not really a problem in real life.”This story was first published by the National Catholic Register, the sister partner of EWTN News, and has been adapted by EWTN News.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/11/u-s-supreme-court-leans-toward-catholic-schools-in-clash-over-pre-k-funding-catholic-a-majority-of-u-s-supreme-court-justices-sounded-ready-to-require-that-colorado-provide-catholic-schools-governm-scaled.jpg)
A Colorado case pits sexual orientation and gender-identity protections against religious standards for school admissions.


Archbishop Hicks said the settlement puts the archdiocese “on the verge of being able to … bring some measure of healing and reconciliation to all victim-survivors.”


Montse Alvarado will make history Nov. 1 as the first laywoman to serve as prefect of a dicastery of the Holy See.


Citing Pope Leo XIV’s call to defend human dignity in the age of AI, the German Bishops’ Conference has joined an initiative to make artificial intelligence safe for children.

![New White House press secretary describes ‘miracle’ when her mother chose adoption over abortion #Catholic Newly appointed White House press secretary and pro-life advocate Katie Zacharia, whose appointment President Donald Trump announced Oct. 9, has shared that her biological mother chose life over abortion in the final moments before a scheduled procedure, calling it a “miracle.”Last year Zacharia, now herself a mother of four and an attorney, described in an interview with “We The People with Gates Garcia” how the precise circumstances of her birth became the foundation of her pro-life convictions.She told Garcia that she was “approximately 20, 30 minutes away from being aborted” when her mother, Ruth, changed her mind.Ruth, whom Zacharia described as having a “tough background of sexual abuse,” was about to head to her abortion appointment when the biological father called, pushing the abortion. Ruth was about to walk out the door to head to the clinic when the phone rang again. Ruth walked back to the phone to answer it, and the Christian counselor who’d called urged her to “consider an open adoption rather than an abortion, so you have an opportunity to know who this child could be and give this child an opportunity to live.”The counselor told her she did not understand “how painful” abortion would be for her, because along with “the loss of [her] baby,” there would be “ensuing psychological, physical … trauma.”Zacharia said her mother decided not to go through with the abortion “to the anger and dismay of her family,” which allowed Zacharia to be adopted as a newborn. She later met her biological mother at age 18, who told her the story. She said that “seconds of a phone call … saved my life,” calling her story “a miracle” that explains why the issue is “so near and dear” to her.Zacharia, who while in law school at Pepperdine University served as president of the university’s Christian Legal Society chapter, has also served on the board of advisers for the White Rose Resistance, a group founded by Seth Gruber that advocates for legal protection for the unborn.Zacharia has been a frequent commentator on Fox News, Newsmax, and other outlets. She also previously worked as general counsel for Fix California, a conservative nonprofit.In February, she became deputy assistant secretary for public affairs at the Department of Homeland Security under then-Secretary Kristi Noem. She resigned after roughly a month, citing the strain on her family of commuting between California, her home, and Washington, D.C. In June, she joined Trump Media & Technology Group/Truth Social as a senior communications adviser.Zacharia succeeds Karoline Leavitt, who in an interview with Sean Hannity last month explained that she left the position to spend more time with her growing family. Trump said Zacharia would begin her new role on Oct. 12 and hold an introductory news conference on Wednesday, Oct. 14, at 9:30 a.m. ET in the White House press briefing room. New White House press secretary describes ‘miracle’ when her mother chose adoption over abortion #Catholic Newly appointed White House press secretary and pro-life advocate Katie Zacharia, whose appointment President Donald Trump announced Oct. 9, has shared that her biological mother chose life over abortion in the final moments before a scheduled procedure, calling it a “miracle.”Last year Zacharia, now herself a mother of four and an attorney, described in an interview with “We The People with Gates Garcia” how the precise circumstances of her birth became the foundation of her pro-life convictions.She told Garcia that she was “approximately 20, 30 minutes away from being aborted” when her mother, Ruth, changed her mind.Ruth, whom Zacharia described as having a “tough background of sexual abuse,” was about to head to her abortion appointment when the biological father called, pushing the abortion. Ruth was about to walk out the door to head to the clinic when the phone rang again. Ruth walked back to the phone to answer it, and the Christian counselor who’d called urged her to “consider an open adoption rather than an abortion, so you have an opportunity to know who this child could be and give this child an opportunity to live.”The counselor told her she did not understand “how painful” abortion would be for her, because along with “the loss of [her] baby,” there would be “ensuing psychological, physical … trauma.”Zacharia said her mother decided not to go through with the abortion “to the anger and dismay of her family,” which allowed Zacharia to be adopted as a newborn. She later met her biological mother at age 18, who told her the story. She said that “seconds of a phone call … saved my life,” calling her story “a miracle” that explains why the issue is “so near and dear” to her.Zacharia, who while in law school at Pepperdine University served as president of the university’s Christian Legal Society chapter, has also served on the board of advisers for the White Rose Resistance, a group founded by Seth Gruber that advocates for legal protection for the unborn.Zacharia has been a frequent commentator on Fox News, Newsmax, and other outlets. She also previously worked as general counsel for Fix California, a conservative nonprofit.In February, she became deputy assistant secretary for public affairs at the Department of Homeland Security under then-Secretary Kristi Noem. She resigned after roughly a month, citing the strain on her family of commuting between California, her home, and Washington, D.C. In June, she joined Trump Media & Technology Group/Truth Social as a senior communications adviser.Zacharia succeeds Karoline Leavitt, who in an interview with Sean Hannity last month explained that she left the position to spend more time with her growing family. Trump said Zacharia would begin her new role on Oct. 12 and hold an introductory news conference on Wednesday, Oct. 14, at 9:30 a.m. ET in the White House press briefing room.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/new-white-house-press-secretary-describes-miracle-when-her-mother-chose-adoption-over-abortion-catholic-newly-appointed-white-house-press-secretary-and-pro-life-advocate-katie-zacha.jpg)
She said that she was “approximately 20, 30 minutes away from being aborted” when her mother changed her mind.



Fraudulent online romance, gambling, and cryptocurrency schemes have defrauded people in more than 125 countries, with Americans losing at least $18.2 billion in 2025, according to a new report.


“Circumstances of a person’s birth should not determine the respect for one’s inherent God-given dignity or the opportunities an individual is able to access,” Archbishop Christophe El-Kassis said.


Pope Leo XIV blessed Olivia Hamelin, a 3-year-old with a rare genetic condition, during his visit to Lourdes, France.



“Let us repeat together: ‘I love you, Jesus. I love you, Mary,’” the pontiff said in his remarks before the rosary in the Vatican Gardens.


The beloved Carmelite nun, patron saint of the missions, and youngest doctor of the Church is celebrated in the universal Church on Oct. 1.


A “culture of reverence” in decades past helped priests avoid scrutiny for abuse, the lengthy report found.


Pope Leo XIV titled this year’s observance of World Day of Migrants and Refugees “Even Just One of These Children,” citing Matthew 18:5: “Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me.”


On the fourth and final day of his apostolic journey to France, the pope addressed European leaders at the Robert Schuman Conference Center and celebrated Mass at the Cathedral of St. Stephen in Metz.

![Pope Leo meets French abuse victims in Lourdes #Catholic LOURDES, France — Pope Leo XIV met seven French victims of clerical sexual abuse on Sunday, making a gesture of solidarity and reconciliation at a shrine world-famous for its healing waters.The nearly two-hour encounter took place at the residence of the local bishop, where Leo is staying for his two nights at the Sanctuary of Our Lady of Lourdes.Speaking to journalists after the meeting, one of the victims, Jérôme Guillement, said, “There was something sincere about [Pope Leo]. With him, every word was carefully chosen; every word had meaning. … There were a lot of emotions.”According to the Holy See Press Office, Leo spent an hour and a half speaking to the four men and three women individually, before addressing them as a group for about 20 minutes and “thanking them for their painful testimony and reaffirming his commitment to ensuring that the harm they experienced is not repeated for others.”He “expressed his solidarity with them and, through them, with all those who have suffered and continue to suffer from the wounds of abuse,” the statement said.Leo also prayed with some of the victims.“I sensed that he was a man of commitment and also a man of resolve,” Olivier Mardi, one of the participants, said after the meeting. “He’s not fooled and knows that these events will continue and that we must remain vigilant… There was an emotional side to it, and at the same time something very powerful when he speaks.”Five of the seven involved in the meeting revealed their identities ahead of the pope’s trip. Among them was Bertrand Virieux, a victim of ex-priest Bernard Preynat, who in 2020 was sentenced to five years in prison for assaults on young scouts in the Archdiocese of Lyon. Preynat died in 2024.The Church in France has been grappling with the repercussions of abuse in the wake of an independent commission’s report that hundreds of thousands of children had been abused by clergy and religious over the past 70 years.The Independent Commission on Sexual Abuse in the Church (CIASE) published a nearly 2,500-page final report in October 2021, estimating that 216,000 children were abused by priests, deacons, monks, or nuns in France from 1950 to 2020.It added that when abuse by lay Church workers was also taken into account, “the estimated number of child victims rises to 330,000 for the whole of the period.”The victims were accompanied by Bishop Gérard Le Stang of Amiens, president of the Council for the Prevention and Combating of Pedophilia within the French bishops’ conference.Guillement said Leo “felt that the Church in France still had a great deal of work to do” to prevent abuse.“We talked about prevention as part of a cultural shift at all levels … There are different opinions, but from his perspective, there’s still a systemic dimension at play,” the man added.According to Mardi, the pontiff “responded well to our very concrete proposals; he knows he has to work with us… He said we need to rekindle hope, and it takes serious commitment to make that happen.”Pope Leo spoke about the clerical sexual abuse of minors in his address to the French bishops on the morning of Sept. 27.“In recent years, you have faced with determination the painful scourge of abuse committed against minors by members of the clergy or in an ecclesial context,” he said.The pontiff praised them for their courageous measures to listen, search for truth, justice, forgiveness, and making amends, as well as “a firm commitment to a culture of prevention and protection against these crimes.”“You must continue along the path you have begun, maintaining the greatest vigilance,” he said.Before addressing the bishops, Leo stopped in front of a memorial for victims of child sexual abuse, featuring the brief reflection of an anonymous victim.“[The victim] will come to understand that it was the entire culture of a system that sought to protect itself rather than protect him,” an inscription on the memorial reads. “And his turmoil continues to deepen around this question: Why can’t justice be done for him? It is so vital to him that he may finally find peace and that the tears of his childhood may cease to flow.”At an open-air Mass later on Sunday morning, the pope seemed to allude to the clerical abuse crisis, saying in his homily that “In order to heal the deep wounds, infidelities and painful errors that have occurred within [the Church], we must humbly place ourselves under the Lord’s purifying gaze. Recognizing our own faults is essential to our spiritual growth.”The pope’s plans for a private conversation with victims ignited controversy among several abuse support groups in France who criticized the format of the meeting and the exclusion of victims’ organizations.Asked about the criticism, Bishop Pierre-Antoine Bozo, the spokesman of the French bishops’ conference, told journalists that “there are many survivor groups … If all of them had been included or brought together, it would have been a very large format, and it would not have had the same impact.”“What helps us most in accompanying victims is listening to them. And to do that, you cannot have 50 people sitting in front of you. That is really what the pope wanted,” Bozo said.The Lourdes shrine was an evocative backdrop for the meeting with abuse victims, since it is among the first shrines to cover artwork by the accused sexual abuser Father Marko Rupnik, currently on trial at the Vatican.Mosaics by Rupnik on the façade of the Basilica of the Rosary were covered ahead of Leo’s visit and will remain indefinitely hidden.“It had come to carry such a symbolic burden for victims that, even though many of the people who come to Lourdes are not abuse victims, for those who are, something had to be done,” Bishop Bozo said.“If it becomes so difficult for people to come to Lourdes, people who should have a privileged place there because they are suffering, then the situation is no longer acceptable,” the spokesman added. “So I think covering the mosaics is a first step. Afterward, something new will have to be proposed, perhaps a new work of art.” Pope Leo meets French abuse victims in Lourdes #Catholic LOURDES, France — Pope Leo XIV met seven French victims of clerical sexual abuse on Sunday, making a gesture of solidarity and reconciliation at a shrine world-famous for its healing waters.The nearly two-hour encounter took place at the residence of the local bishop, where Leo is staying for his two nights at the Sanctuary of Our Lady of Lourdes.Speaking to journalists after the meeting, one of the victims, Jérôme Guillement, said, “There was something sincere about [Pope Leo]. With him, every word was carefully chosen; every word had meaning. … There were a lot of emotions.”According to the Holy See Press Office, Leo spent an hour and a half speaking to the four men and three women individually, before addressing them as a group for about 20 minutes and “thanking them for their painful testimony and reaffirming his commitment to ensuring that the harm they experienced is not repeated for others.”He “expressed his solidarity with them and, through them, with all those who have suffered and continue to suffer from the wounds of abuse,” the statement said.Leo also prayed with some of the victims.“I sensed that he was a man of commitment and also a man of resolve,” Olivier Mardi, one of the participants, said after the meeting. “He’s not fooled and knows that these events will continue and that we must remain vigilant… There was an emotional side to it, and at the same time something very powerful when he speaks.”Five of the seven involved in the meeting revealed their identities ahead of the pope’s trip. Among them was Bertrand Virieux, a victim of ex-priest Bernard Preynat, who in 2020 was sentenced to five years in prison for assaults on young scouts in the Archdiocese of Lyon. Preynat died in 2024.The Church in France has been grappling with the repercussions of abuse in the wake of an independent commission’s report that hundreds of thousands of children had been abused by clergy and religious over the past 70 years.The Independent Commission on Sexual Abuse in the Church (CIASE) published a nearly 2,500-page final report in October 2021, estimating that 216,000 children were abused by priests, deacons, monks, or nuns in France from 1950 to 2020.It added that when abuse by lay Church workers was also taken into account, “the estimated number of child victims rises to 330,000 for the whole of the period.”The victims were accompanied by Bishop Gérard Le Stang of Amiens, president of the Council for the Prevention and Combating of Pedophilia within the French bishops’ conference.Guillement said Leo “felt that the Church in France still had a great deal of work to do” to prevent abuse.“We talked about prevention as part of a cultural shift at all levels … There are different opinions, but from his perspective, there’s still a systemic dimension at play,” the man added.According to Mardi, the pontiff “responded well to our very concrete proposals; he knows he has to work with us… He said we need to rekindle hope, and it takes serious commitment to make that happen.”Pope Leo spoke about the clerical sexual abuse of minors in his address to the French bishops on the morning of Sept. 27.“In recent years, you have faced with determination the painful scourge of abuse committed against minors by members of the clergy or in an ecclesial context,” he said.The pontiff praised them for their courageous measures to listen, search for truth, justice, forgiveness, and making amends, as well as “a firm commitment to a culture of prevention and protection against these crimes.”“You must continue along the path you have begun, maintaining the greatest vigilance,” he said.Before addressing the bishops, Leo stopped in front of a memorial for victims of child sexual abuse, featuring the brief reflection of an anonymous victim.“[The victim] will come to understand that it was the entire culture of a system that sought to protect itself rather than protect him,” an inscription on the memorial reads. “And his turmoil continues to deepen around this question: Why can’t justice be done for him? It is so vital to him that he may finally find peace and that the tears of his childhood may cease to flow.”At an open-air Mass later on Sunday morning, the pope seemed to allude to the clerical abuse crisis, saying in his homily that “In order to heal the deep wounds, infidelities and painful errors that have occurred within [the Church], we must humbly place ourselves under the Lord’s purifying gaze. Recognizing our own faults is essential to our spiritual growth.”The pope’s plans for a private conversation with victims ignited controversy among several abuse support groups in France who criticized the format of the meeting and the exclusion of victims’ organizations.Asked about the criticism, Bishop Pierre-Antoine Bozo, the spokesman of the French bishops’ conference, told journalists that “there are many survivor groups … If all of them had been included or brought together, it would have been a very large format, and it would not have had the same impact.”“What helps us most in accompanying victims is listening to them. And to do that, you cannot have 50 people sitting in front of you. That is really what the pope wanted,” Bozo said.The Lourdes shrine was an evocative backdrop for the meeting with abuse victims, since it is among the first shrines to cover artwork by the accused sexual abuser Father Marko Rupnik, currently on trial at the Vatican.Mosaics by Rupnik on the façade of the Basilica of the Rosary were covered ahead of Leo’s visit and will remain indefinitely hidden.“It had come to carry such a symbolic burden for victims that, even though many of the people who come to Lourdes are not abuse victims, for those who are, something had to be done,” Bishop Bozo said.“If it becomes so difficult for people to come to Lourdes, people who should have a privileged place there because they are suffering, then the situation is no longer acceptable,” the spokesman added. “So I think covering the mosaics is a first step. Afterward, something new will have to be proposed, perhaps a new work of art.”](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/pope-leo-meets-french-abuse-victims-in-lourdes-catholic-lourdes-france-pope-leo-xiv-met-seven-french-victims-of-clerical-sexual-abuse-on-sunday-making-a-gesture-of-solidarity-and-reconcil-scaled.jpg)
The pontiff “expressed his solidarity with them and, through them, with all those who have suffered and continue to suffer from the wounds of abuse,” the Vatican said.


France’s Catholic culture and the energy of the country’s young people stole the show at a prayer vigil at the national stadium in Saint-Denis, France.


