counsel

‘Every execution should be stopped’: How U.S. bishops work to save prisoners on death row #Catholic null / Credit: txking/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Oct 25, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA). Bishops in multiple U.S. states are leading efforts to spare the lives of condemned prisoners facing execution — urging clemency in line with the Catholic Church’s relatively recent but unambiguous declaration that the death penalty is not permissible and should be abolished. Executions in the United States have been increasingly less common for years. Following the death penalty’s re-legalization by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1976, executions peaked in the country around the turn of the century before beginning a gradual decline.Still, more than 1,600 prisoners have been executed since the late 1970s. The largest number of those executions has been carried out in Texas, which has killed 596 prisoners over that time period.As with other states, the Catholic bishops of Texas regularly petition the state government to issue clemency to prisoners facing death. Jennifer Allmon, the executive director of the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops, told CNA that the state’s bishops regularly urge officials to commute death penalty sentences to life in prison. “We refer to it as the Mercy Project,” she said. Though popular perception holds that the governor of a state is the ultimate arbiter of a condemned prisoner’s fate, Allmon said in Texas that’s not the case. “The state Board of Pardons and Paroles has the ultimate authority,” she said. “The governor is only allowed to issue a 30-day stay on an execution one time. He doesn’t actually have the power to grant a permanent clemency.” “We don’t encourage phone calls to the governor because it’s not going to be a meaningful order,” she pointed out. “The board has a lot more authority.”Allmon said the bishops advocate on behalf of every condemned prisoner in the state. “We send a letter to the Board of Pardons and Paroles and copy the governor for every single execution during the time period when the board is reviewing clemency applications,” she said. “Typically they hold reviews about 21 days before the execution. We time our letters to arrive shortly before that.” “We research every single case,” she said. “We speak to the defendant’s legal counsel for additional information. We personalize each letter to urge prayer for the victims and their families, we mention them by name, and we share any mitigating circumstances or reason in particular that the execution is unjust, while always acknowledging that every execution should be stopped.”Some offenders, Allmon said, want to be executed. “We do a letter anyway. We think it’s important that on principle we speak out for every execution.”In Missouri, meanwhile, the state’s Catholic bishops similarly advocate for every prisoner facing execution by the government. Missouri has been among the most prolific executors of condemned prisoners since 1976. More than half of the 102 people executed there over the last 50 years have been under Democratic governors; then-Gov. Mel Carnahan oversaw 38 state executions from 1993 to 2000 alone. Jamie Morris, the executive director of the Missouri Catholic Conference, told CNA that the state bishops “send a clemency request for every prisoner set to be executed, either through a letter from the Missouri Catholic Conference or through a joint letter of the bishops.”“We also highlight every upcoming execution through our MCC publications and encourage our network to contact the governor to ask for clemency,” he said. Individual dioceses, meanwhile, carry out education and outreach to inform the faithful of the Church’s teaching on the death penalty. What does the Church actually teach?The Vatican in 2018 revised its teaching on the death penalty, holding that though capital punishment was “long considered an appropriate response” to some crimes, evolving standards and more effective methods of imprisonment and detention mean the death penalty is now “inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person.”The Church “works with determination for its abolition worldwide,” says the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the revision of which was approved by Pope Francis. The Church’s revision came after years of increasing opposition to the death penalty by popes in the modern era. Then-Pope John Paul II in 1997 revised the catechism to reflect what he acknowledged was a “growing tendency, both in the Church and in civil society, to demand that [the death penalty] be applied in a very limited way or even that it be abolished completely.”The Death Penalty Information Center says that 23 states and the District of Columbia have abolished capital punishment. Morris told CNA that bills to abolish the death penalty are filed “every year” in Missouri, though he said those measures have “not been heard in a legislative committee” during his time at the Catholic conference. Bishops have thus focused their legislative efforts on advocating against a provision in the Missouri code that allows a judge to sentence an individual to death when a jury cannot reach a unanimous decision on the death penalty. Brett Farley, who heads the Catholic Conference of Oklahoma, said the state’s bishops have been active in opposing capital punishment there after a six-year moratorium on the death penalty lapsed in 2021 and executions resumed. Oklahoma City Archbishop Paul Coakley and Tulsa Bishop David Konderla “have been very outspoken both in calling for clemency of death row inmates and, generally, calling for an end to the death penalty,” Farley said. The prelates have called for abolition via Catholic publications and in op-eds, he said.The state’s bishops through the Tulsa Diocese and Oklahoma City Archdiocese have also instituted programs in which clergy and laity both minister to the condemned and their families, Farley said. The state Catholic conference, meanwhile, has led the effort to pass a proposed legislative ban on the death penalty. That measure has moved out of committee in both chambers of the state Legislature, Farley said. “We have also commissioned recent polls that show overwhelming support for moratorium among Oklahoma voters, which demonstrate as many as 78% agreeing that ‘a pause’ on executions is appropriate to ensure we do not execute innocent people,” he said. Catholics across the United States have regularly led efforts to abolish the death penalty. The Washington, D.C.-based group Catholic Mobilizing Network, for instance, arose out of the U.S. bishops’ 2005 Catholic Campaign to End the Use of the Death Penalty. The group urges activists to take part in anti-death penalty campaigns in numerous states, including petitioning the federal government to end the death penalty, using a “three-tiered approach of education, advocacy, and prayer.”Catholics have also worked to end the death penalty at the federal level. Sixteen people have been executed by the federal government since 1976. Executions in the states have increased over the last few years, though they have not come near the highs of the late 1990s and early 2000s. Allmon said Texas is seeing “fewer executions in general” relative to earlier years. The number of executions was very high under Gov. Rick Perry, she said; the Republican governor ultimately witnessed the carrying out of 279 death sentences over his 15 years as governor. Since 2015, current Gov. Greg Abbott has presided over a comparatively smaller 78 executions. “It still shouldn’t happen,” she said, “but it’s a huge reduction.”
Read More

‘Every execution should be stopped’: How U.S. bishops work to save prisoners on death row #Catholic null / Credit: txking/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Oct 25, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA). Bishops in multiple U.S. states are leading efforts to spare the lives of condemned prisoners facing execution — urging clemency in line with the Catholic Church’s relatively recent but unambiguous declaration that the death penalty is not permissible and should be abolished. Executions in the United States have been increasingly less common for years. Following the death penalty’s re-legalization by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1976, executions peaked in the country around the turn of the century before beginning a gradual decline.Still, more than 1,600 prisoners have been executed since the late 1970s. The largest number of those executions has been carried out in Texas, which has killed 596 prisoners over that time period.As with other states, the Catholic bishops of Texas regularly petition the state government to issue clemency to prisoners facing death. Jennifer Allmon, the executive director of the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops, told CNA that the state’s bishops regularly urge officials to commute death penalty sentences to life in prison. “We refer to it as the Mercy Project,” she said. Though popular perception holds that the governor of a state is the ultimate arbiter of a condemned prisoner’s fate, Allmon said in Texas that’s not the case. “The state Board of Pardons and Paroles has the ultimate authority,” she said. “The governor is only allowed to issue a 30-day stay on an execution one time. He doesn’t actually have the power to grant a permanent clemency.” “We don’t encourage phone calls to the governor because it’s not going to be a meaningful order,” she pointed out. “The board has a lot more authority.”Allmon said the bishops advocate on behalf of every condemned prisoner in the state. “We send a letter to the Board of Pardons and Paroles and copy the governor for every single execution during the time period when the board is reviewing clemency applications,” she said. “Typically they hold reviews about 21 days before the execution. We time our letters to arrive shortly before that.” “We research every single case,” she said. “We speak to the defendant’s legal counsel for additional information. We personalize each letter to urge prayer for the victims and their families, we mention them by name, and we share any mitigating circumstances or reason in particular that the execution is unjust, while always acknowledging that every execution should be stopped.”Some offenders, Allmon said, want to be executed. “We do a letter anyway. We think it’s important that on principle we speak out for every execution.”In Missouri, meanwhile, the state’s Catholic bishops similarly advocate for every prisoner facing execution by the government. Missouri has been among the most prolific executors of condemned prisoners since 1976. More than half of the 102 people executed there over the last 50 years have been under Democratic governors; then-Gov. Mel Carnahan oversaw 38 state executions from 1993 to 2000 alone. Jamie Morris, the executive director of the Missouri Catholic Conference, told CNA that the state bishops “send a clemency request for every prisoner set to be executed, either through a letter from the Missouri Catholic Conference or through a joint letter of the bishops.”“We also highlight every upcoming execution through our MCC publications and encourage our network to contact the governor to ask for clemency,” he said. Individual dioceses, meanwhile, carry out education and outreach to inform the faithful of the Church’s teaching on the death penalty. What does the Church actually teach?The Vatican in 2018 revised its teaching on the death penalty, holding that though capital punishment was “long considered an appropriate response” to some crimes, evolving standards and more effective methods of imprisonment and detention mean the death penalty is now “inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person.”The Church “works with determination for its abolition worldwide,” says the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the revision of which was approved by Pope Francis. The Church’s revision came after years of increasing opposition to the death penalty by popes in the modern era. Then-Pope John Paul II in 1997 revised the catechism to reflect what he acknowledged was a “growing tendency, both in the Church and in civil society, to demand that [the death penalty] be applied in a very limited way or even that it be abolished completely.”The Death Penalty Information Center says that 23 states and the District of Columbia have abolished capital punishment. Morris told CNA that bills to abolish the death penalty are filed “every year” in Missouri, though he said those measures have “not been heard in a legislative committee” during his time at the Catholic conference. Bishops have thus focused their legislative efforts on advocating against a provision in the Missouri code that allows a judge to sentence an individual to death when a jury cannot reach a unanimous decision on the death penalty. Brett Farley, who heads the Catholic Conference of Oklahoma, said the state’s bishops have been active in opposing capital punishment there after a six-year moratorium on the death penalty lapsed in 2021 and executions resumed. Oklahoma City Archbishop Paul Coakley and Tulsa Bishop David Konderla “have been very outspoken both in calling for clemency of death row inmates and, generally, calling for an end to the death penalty,” Farley said. The prelates have called for abolition via Catholic publications and in op-eds, he said.The state’s bishops through the Tulsa Diocese and Oklahoma City Archdiocese have also instituted programs in which clergy and laity both minister to the condemned and their families, Farley said. The state Catholic conference, meanwhile, has led the effort to pass a proposed legislative ban on the death penalty. That measure has moved out of committee in both chambers of the state Legislature, Farley said. “We have also commissioned recent polls that show overwhelming support for moratorium among Oklahoma voters, which demonstrate as many as 78% agreeing that ‘a pause’ on executions is appropriate to ensure we do not execute innocent people,” he said. Catholics across the United States have regularly led efforts to abolish the death penalty. The Washington, D.C.-based group Catholic Mobilizing Network, for instance, arose out of the U.S. bishops’ 2005 Catholic Campaign to End the Use of the Death Penalty. The group urges activists to take part in anti-death penalty campaigns in numerous states, including petitioning the federal government to end the death penalty, using a “three-tiered approach of education, advocacy, and prayer.”Catholics have also worked to end the death penalty at the federal level. Sixteen people have been executed by the federal government since 1976. Executions in the states have increased over the last few years, though they have not come near the highs of the late 1990s and early 2000s. Allmon said Texas is seeing “fewer executions in general” relative to earlier years. The number of executions was very high under Gov. Rick Perry, she said; the Republican governor ultimately witnessed the carrying out of 279 death sentences over his 15 years as governor. Since 2015, current Gov. Greg Abbott has presided over a comparatively smaller 78 executions. “It still shouldn’t happen,” she said, “but it’s a huge reduction.”

unitedyam

null / Credit: txking/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Oct 25, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA).

Bishops in multiple U.S. states are leading efforts to spare the lives of condemned prisoners facing execution — urging clemency in line with the Catholic Church’s relatively recent but unambiguous declaration that the death penalty is not permissible and should be abolished. 

Executions in the United States have been increasingly less common for years. Following the death penalty’s re-legalization by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1976, executions peaked in the country around the turn of the century before beginning a gradual decline.

Still, more than 1,600 prisoners have been executed since the late 1970s. The largest number of those executions has been carried out in Texas, which has killed 596 prisoners over that time period.

As with other states, the Catholic bishops of Texas regularly petition the state government to issue clemency to prisoners facing death. Jennifer Allmon, the executive director of the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops, told CNA that the state’s bishops regularly urge officials to commute death penalty sentences to life in prison. 

“We refer to it as the Mercy Project,” she said. 

Though popular perception holds that the governor of a state is the ultimate arbiter of a condemned prisoner’s fate, Allmon said in Texas that’s not the case. 

“The state Board of Pardons and Paroles has the ultimate authority,” she said. “The governor is only allowed to issue a 30-day stay on an execution one time. He doesn’t actually have the power to grant a permanent clemency.” 

“We don’t encourage phone calls to the governor because it’s not going to be a meaningful order,” she pointed out. “The board has a lot more authority.”

Allmon said the bishops advocate on behalf of every condemned prisoner in the state. 

“We send a letter to the Board of Pardons and Paroles and copy the governor for every single execution during the time period when the board is reviewing clemency applications,” she said. “Typically they hold reviews about 21 days before the execution. We time our letters to arrive shortly before that.” 

“We research every single case,” she said. “We speak to the defendant’s legal counsel for additional information. We personalize each letter to urge prayer for the victims and their families, we mention them by name, and we share any mitigating circumstances or reason in particular that the execution is unjust, while always acknowledging that every execution should be stopped.”

Some offenders, Allmon said, want to be executed. “We do a letter anyway. We think it’s important that on principle we speak out for every execution.”

In Missouri, meanwhile, the state’s Catholic bishops similarly advocate for every prisoner facing execution by the government. 

Missouri has been among the most prolific executors of condemned prisoners since 1976. More than half of the 102 people executed there over the last 50 years have been under Democratic governors; then-Gov. Mel Carnahan oversaw 38 state executions from 1993 to 2000 alone. 

Jamie Morris, the executive director of the Missouri Catholic Conference, told CNA that the state bishops “send a clemency request for every prisoner set to be executed, either through a letter from the Missouri Catholic Conference or through a joint letter of the bishops.”

“We also highlight every upcoming execution through our MCC publications and encourage our network to contact the governor to ask for clemency,” he said. Individual dioceses, meanwhile, carry out education and outreach to inform the faithful of the Church’s teaching on the death penalty. 

What does the Church actually teach?

The Vatican in 2018 revised its teaching on the death penalty, holding that though capital punishment was “long considered an appropriate response” to some crimes, evolving standards and more effective methods of imprisonment and detention mean the death penalty is now “inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person.”

The Church “works with determination for its abolition worldwide,” says the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the revision of which was approved by Pope Francis. 

The Church’s revision came after years of increasing opposition to the death penalty by popes in the modern era. Then-Pope John Paul II in 1997 revised the catechism to reflect what he acknowledged was a “growing tendency, both in the Church and in civil society, to demand that [the death penalty] be applied in a very limited way or even that it be abolished completely.”

The Death Penalty Information Center says that 23 states and the District of Columbia have abolished capital punishment. Morris told CNA that bills to abolish the death penalty are filed “every year” in Missouri, though he said those measures have “not been heard in a legislative committee” during his time at the Catholic conference. 

Bishops have thus focused their legislative efforts on advocating against a provision in the Missouri code that allows a judge to sentence an individual to death when a jury cannot reach a unanimous decision on the death penalty. 

Brett Farley, who heads the Catholic Conference of Oklahoma, said the state’s bishops have been active in opposing capital punishment there after a six-year moratorium on the death penalty lapsed in 2021 and executions resumed. 

Oklahoma City Archbishop Paul Coakley and Tulsa Bishop David Konderla “have been very outspoken both in calling for clemency of death row inmates and, generally, calling for an end to the death penalty,” Farley said. The prelates have called for abolition via Catholic publications and in op-eds, he said.

The state’s bishops through the Tulsa Diocese and Oklahoma City Archdiocese have also instituted programs in which clergy and laity both minister to the condemned and their families, Farley said. 

The state Catholic conference, meanwhile, has led the effort to pass a proposed legislative ban on the death penalty. That measure has moved out of committee in both chambers of the state Legislature, Farley said. 

“We have also commissioned recent polls that show overwhelming support for moratorium among Oklahoma voters, which demonstrate as many as 78% agreeing that ‘a pause’ on executions is appropriate to ensure we do not execute innocent people,” he said. 

Catholics across the United States have regularly led efforts to abolish the death penalty. The Washington, D.C.-based group Catholic Mobilizing Network, for instance, arose out of the U.S. bishops’ 2005 Catholic Campaign to End the Use of the Death Penalty. 

The group urges activists to take part in anti-death penalty campaigns in numerous states, including petitioning the federal government to end the death penalty, using a “three-tiered approach of education, advocacy, and prayer.”

Catholics have also worked to end the death penalty at the federal level. Sixteen people have been executed by the federal government since 1976. 

Executions in the states have increased over the last few years, though they have not come near the highs of the late 1990s and early 2000s. Allmon said Texas is seeing “fewer executions in general” relative to earlier years. 

The number of executions was very high under Gov. Rick Perry, she said; the Republican governor ultimately witnessed the carrying out of 279 death sentences over his 15 years as governor. Since 2015, current Gov. Greg Abbott has presided over a comparatively smaller 78 executions. 

“It still shouldn’t happen,” she said, “but it’s a huge reduction.”

Read More
Pregnancy centers fight California ‘censorship’ of abortion pill reversal drug #Catholic null / Credit: Zolnierek / Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 10, 2025 / 16:37 pm (CNA). Pro-life pregnancy centers urged an appellate court to block California’s alleged “censorship” of their speech about medication designed to thwart the effects of the abortion drug mifepristone during oral arguments on Oct. 9.Abortion Pill Reversal (APR) is recommended or dispensed by pro-life pregnancy centers to prevent the completion of an abortion shortly after a woman takes mifepristone to achieve a chemical abortion.Mifepristone works by blocking the hormone progesterone, which cuts off the unborn child’s supply of oxygen and nutrients, according to the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute. APR operates as a progesterone supplement that is meant to compete with mifepristone by restoring the hormone in hopes that the woman can carry her pregnancy through to birth, according to the Charlotte Lozier Institute. Although California has not tried to prohibit use of APR or prevent medical professionals from supplying it to women, Attorney General Rob Bonta in 2023 sued five pro-life pregnancy centers for promoting the medicine, accusing them of making false and misleading claims. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) does not recommend the use of APR, citing insufficient evidence. Alternatively, the American Association of Pro-life OBGYNs (AAPLOG) states the literature “clearly shows that the blockade is reversible with natural progesterone.” Several pro-life pregnancy centers sued by California responded with lawsuits accusing Bonta of infringing on their First Amendment rights. Two cases were heard by a three-judge panel for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 9.“Abortion pill reversal is a lawful and life-saving treatment,” Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Caleb Dalton, who is representing the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), told the judges.“It occurs only after a conversation and informed consent from a licensed medical professional,” he said, and accused the attorney general of “trying to censor information about that so the conversation never happens.”Peter Breen, Thomas More Society executive vice president, who is representing Culture of Life Family Services (COLFS), told the judges the attorney general is motivated by “animus” toward the pro-life movement following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.“There’s no evidence on the record that anyone’s been harmed, and we’re almost 20 years into this, over 10 years at COLFS, and 400 babies born,” Breen told the judges.“There’s no consumer protection here,” he continued. “There is no consumer to be protected. Women have been choosing this. The problem is: Are they going to know that they even have the option?”Judges question California’s ‘state interest’The California attorney general’s office was represented in court by Deputy Attorney General Erica Connolly, who argued that the studies backing the safety and effectiveness of APR are insufficient.Connolly referenced an oft-cited study by George Delgado, which found that certain forms of progesterone supplements have a 64% to 68% success rate when used as an abortion pill reversal.She accused pro-life pregnancy centers of misrepresenting the study and asserted the research is “not sufficient” in supporting its conclusions because it’s a “retrospective analysis” and “not a randomized controlled study.”Judge Anthony Johnstone responded, asking: “As a matter of First Amendment doctrine, why does that matter if they’re reporting that a study says what the study says?” Johnstone also noted the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved drugs with lower effectiveness rates.Connolly alternatively argued that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has restricted advertisements when studies are “insufficient.”Johnstone followed up, noting that California has not regulated the procedure itself but only the speech surrounding it and asked: “Why would it require lower evidence to regulate speech about that process?”Connolly responded by saying advertisements affect the “informed consent process.” She said one cannot advertise “a treatment is safe and effective and that it does something that the scientific evidence does not establish that it does.”Both Johnstone and Judge Eric Miller also expressed concern that the attorney general’s office did not adequately demonstrate the state’s interest in regulating the speech surrounding APR. In response Connolly said the interest is in “protecting individuals from misleading commercial speech about medical treatments.”Ongoing scientific debateJudge Johnnie Rawlinson raised the point that some medical associations have declined to sign off on APR as effective, but Dalton argued that disagreements within the medical community are “exactly what the First Amendment protects.”Dalton argued Californians should be free to discuss scientific studies “without fear that the attorney general is going to silence them.” He said the First Amendment provides for “open discussion — not censorship.”
Read More

Pregnancy centers fight California ‘censorship’ of abortion pill reversal drug #Catholic null / Credit: Zolnierek / Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 10, 2025 / 16:37 pm (CNA). Pro-life pregnancy centers urged an appellate court to block California’s alleged “censorship” of their speech about medication designed to thwart the effects of the abortion drug mifepristone during oral arguments on Oct. 9.Abortion Pill Reversal (APR) is recommended or dispensed by pro-life pregnancy centers to prevent the completion of an abortion shortly after a woman takes mifepristone to achieve a chemical abortion.Mifepristone works by blocking the hormone progesterone, which cuts off the unborn child’s supply of oxygen and nutrients, according to the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute. APR operates as a progesterone supplement that is meant to compete with mifepristone by restoring the hormone in hopes that the woman can carry her pregnancy through to birth, according to the Charlotte Lozier Institute. Although California has not tried to prohibit use of APR or prevent medical professionals from supplying it to women, Attorney General Rob Bonta in 2023 sued five pro-life pregnancy centers for promoting the medicine, accusing them of making false and misleading claims. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) does not recommend the use of APR, citing insufficient evidence. Alternatively, the American Association of Pro-life OBGYNs (AAPLOG) states the literature “clearly shows that the blockade is reversible with natural progesterone.” Several pro-life pregnancy centers sued by California responded with lawsuits accusing Bonta of infringing on their First Amendment rights. Two cases were heard by a three-judge panel for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 9.“Abortion pill reversal is a lawful and life-saving treatment,” Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Caleb Dalton, who is representing the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), told the judges.“It occurs only after a conversation and informed consent from a licensed medical professional,” he said, and accused the attorney general of “trying to censor information about that so the conversation never happens.”Peter Breen, Thomas More Society executive vice president, who is representing Culture of Life Family Services (COLFS), told the judges the attorney general is motivated by “animus” toward the pro-life movement following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.“There’s no evidence on the record that anyone’s been harmed, and we’re almost 20 years into this, over 10 years at COLFS, and 400 babies born,” Breen told the judges.“There’s no consumer protection here,” he continued. “There is no consumer to be protected. Women have been choosing this. The problem is: Are they going to know that they even have the option?”Judges question California’s ‘state interest’The California attorney general’s office was represented in court by Deputy Attorney General Erica Connolly, who argued that the studies backing the safety and effectiveness of APR are insufficient.Connolly referenced an oft-cited study by George Delgado, which found that certain forms of progesterone supplements have a 64% to 68% success rate when used as an abortion pill reversal.She accused pro-life pregnancy centers of misrepresenting the study and asserted the research is “not sufficient” in supporting its conclusions because it’s a “retrospective analysis” and “not a randomized controlled study.”Judge Anthony Johnstone responded, asking: “As a matter of First Amendment doctrine, why does that matter if they’re reporting that a study says what the study says?” Johnstone also noted the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved drugs with lower effectiveness rates.Connolly alternatively argued that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has restricted advertisements when studies are “insufficient.”Johnstone followed up, noting that California has not regulated the procedure itself but only the speech surrounding it and asked: “Why would it require lower evidence to regulate speech about that process?”Connolly responded by saying advertisements affect the “informed consent process.” She said one cannot advertise “a treatment is safe and effective and that it does something that the scientific evidence does not establish that it does.”Both Johnstone and Judge Eric Miller also expressed concern that the attorney general’s office did not adequately demonstrate the state’s interest in regulating the speech surrounding APR. In response Connolly said the interest is in “protecting individuals from misleading commercial speech about medical treatments.”Ongoing scientific debateJudge Johnnie Rawlinson raised the point that some medical associations have declined to sign off on APR as effective, but Dalton argued that disagreements within the medical community are “exactly what the First Amendment protects.”Dalton argued Californians should be free to discuss scientific studies “without fear that the attorney general is going to silence them.” He said the First Amendment provides for “open discussion — not censorship.”

unitedyam

null / Credit: Zolnierek / Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 10, 2025 / 16:37 pm (CNA).

Pro-life pregnancy centers urged an appellate court to block California’s alleged “censorship” of their speech about medication designed to thwart the effects of the abortion drug mifepristone during oral arguments on Oct. 9.

Abortion Pill Reversal (APR) is recommended or dispensed by pro-life pregnancy centers to prevent the completion of an abortion shortly after a woman takes mifepristone to achieve a chemical abortion.

Mifepristone works by blocking the hormone progesterone, which cuts off the unborn child’s supply of oxygen and nutrients, according to the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute. APR operates as a progesterone supplement that is meant to compete with mifepristone by restoring the hormone in hopes that the woman can carry her pregnancy through to birth, according to the Charlotte Lozier Institute. 

Although California has not tried to prohibit use of APR or prevent medical professionals from supplying it to women, Attorney General Rob Bonta in 2023 sued five pro-life pregnancy centers for promoting the medicine, accusing them of making false and misleading claims. 

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) does not recommend the use of APR, citing insufficient evidence. Alternatively, the American Association of Pro-life OBGYNs (AAPLOG) states the literature “clearly shows that the blockade is reversible with natural progesterone.” 

Several pro-life pregnancy centers sued by California responded with lawsuits accusing Bonta of infringing on their First Amendment rights. Two cases were heard by a three-judge panel for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 9.

“Abortion pill reversal is a lawful and life-saving treatment,” Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Caleb Dalton, who is representing the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), told the judges.

“It occurs only after a conversation and informed consent from a licensed medical professional,” he said, and accused the attorney general of “trying to censor information about that so the conversation never happens.”

Peter Breen, Thomas More Society executive vice president, who is representing Culture of Life Family Services (COLFS), told the judges the attorney general is motivated by “animus” toward the pro-life movement following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

“There’s no evidence on the record that anyone’s been harmed, and we’re almost 20 years into this, over 10 years at COLFS, and 400 babies born,” Breen told the judges.

“There’s no consumer protection here,” he continued. “There is no consumer to be protected. Women have been choosing this. The problem is: Are they going to know that they even have the option?”

Judges question California’s ‘state interest’

The California attorney general’s office was represented in court by Deputy Attorney General Erica Connolly, who argued that the studies backing the safety and effectiveness of APR are insufficient.

Connolly referenced an oft-cited study by George Delgado, which found that certain forms of progesterone supplements have a 64% to 68% success rate when used as an abortion pill reversal.

She accused pro-life pregnancy centers of misrepresenting the study and asserted the research is “not sufficient” in supporting its conclusions because it’s a “retrospective analysis” and “not a randomized controlled study.”

Judge Anthony Johnstone responded, asking: “As a matter of First Amendment doctrine, why does that matter if they’re reporting that a study says what the study says?” Johnstone also noted the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved drugs with lower effectiveness rates.

Connolly alternatively argued that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has restricted advertisements when studies are “insufficient.”

Johnstone followed up, noting that California has not regulated the procedure itself but only the speech surrounding it and asked: “Why would it require lower evidence to regulate speech about that process?”

Connolly responded by saying advertisements affect the “informed consent process.” She said one cannot advertise “a treatment is safe and effective and that it does something that the scientific evidence does not establish that it does.”

Both Johnstone and Judge Eric Miller also expressed concern that the attorney general’s office did not adequately demonstrate the state’s interest in regulating the speech surrounding APR. In response Connolly said the interest is in “protecting individuals from misleading commercial speech about medical treatments.”

Ongoing scientific debate

Judge Johnnie Rawlinson raised the point that some medical associations have declined to sign off on APR as effective, but Dalton argued that disagreements within the medical community are “exactly what the First Amendment protects.”

Dalton argued Californians should be free to discuss scientific studies “without fear that the attorney general is going to silence them.” He said the First Amendment provides for “open discussion — not censorship.”

Read More
Washington state drops effort to make priests violate seal of confession in reporting law #Catholic null / Credit: Brian A Jackson/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Oct 10, 2025 / 14:37 pm (CNA). Officials in Washington state have agreed to back off a controversial effort to force priests there to violate the seal of confession as part of a mandatory abuse reporting law. A motion filed in federal district court on Oct. 10 affirmed that state and local governments would stop attempting to require priests to report child abuse learned during the sacrament of reconciliation.The state attorney general’s office on Oct. 10 said in a press release that clergy would remain mandatory reporters under state law, but prosecutors would agree “not to enforce reporting requirements for information clergy learn solely through confession or its equivalent in other faiths.”The agreement brings an end to a high-profile and controversial effort by Washington government leaders to violate one of the Catholic Church’s most sacred and inviolable directives, one that requires priests to maintain absolute secrecy over what they learn during confession or else face excommunication. Washington’s revised mandatory reporting law, passed by the state Legislature earlier this year and signed by Gov. Robert Ferguson, added clergy to the list of mandatory abuse reporters in the state. But it didn’t include an exemption for information learned in the confessional, explicitly leaving priests out of a “privileged communication” exception afforded to other professionals.The state’s bishops successfully blocked the law in federal court in July, though the threat of the statute still loomed if the state government was successful at appeal. In the July ruling, District Judge David Estudillo said there was “no question” that the law burdened the free exercise of religion.“In situations where [priests] hear confessions related to child abuse or neglect, [the rule] places them in the position of either complying with the requirements of their faith or violating the law,” the judge wrote.The state’s reversal on Oct. 10 brought cheers from religious liberty advocates, including the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represented state bishops in their suit against the state government. “Washington was wise to walk away from this draconian law and allow Catholic clergy to continue ministering to the faithful,” Becket CEO and President Mark Rienzi said. “This is a victory for religious freedom and for common sense. Priests should never be forced to make the impossible choice of betraying their sacred vows or going to jail.” Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel John Bursch on Friday said the legal advocacy group was “pleased the state agreed to swiftly restore the constitutionally protected freedom of churches and priests.” The legal group had represented Orthodox churches and a priest in their own suit. “Washington was targeting priests by compelling them to break the sacred confidentiality of confession while protecting other confidential communications, like those between attorneys and their clients. That’s rank religious discrimination,” Bursch said. On X, the Washington State Catholic Conference said that Church leaders in the state “consistently supported the law’s broader goal of strengthening protections for minors.” Church leaders “asked only for a narrow exemption to protect the sacrament of confession,” the conference said. “In every other setting other than the confessional, the Church has long supported — and continues to support — mandatory reporting,” the conference added. “We’re grateful Washington ultimately recognized it can prevent abuse without forcing priests to violate their sacred vows.”The legal fight had drawn the backing of a wide variety of supporters and backers, including the Trump administration, Bishop Robert Barron, and a global priests’ group, among numerous others.Well ahead of the law’s passage, Spokane Bishop Thomas Daly had promised Catholics in the state that priests would face prison time rather than violate the seal of confession. “I want to assure you that your shepherds, bishop and priests, are committed to keeping the seal of confession — even to the point of going to jail,” Daly told the faithful in April 2023.The Washington bishops, meanwhile, noted on Oct. 10 that the Catholic Church has upheld the sanctity of confession “for centuries.” “Priests have been imprisoned, tortured, and even killed for upholding the seal of confession,” the state Catholic conference said. “Penitents today need the same assurance that their participation in a holy sacrament will remain free from government interference.”
Read More

Washington state drops effort to make priests violate seal of confession in reporting law #Catholic null / Credit: Brian A Jackson/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Oct 10, 2025 / 14:37 pm (CNA). Officials in Washington state have agreed to back off a controversial effort to force priests there to violate the seal of confession as part of a mandatory abuse reporting law. A motion filed in federal district court on Oct. 10 affirmed that state and local governments would stop attempting to require priests to report child abuse learned during the sacrament of reconciliation.The state attorney general’s office on Oct. 10 said in a press release that clergy would remain mandatory reporters under state law, but prosecutors would agree “not to enforce reporting requirements for information clergy learn solely through confession or its equivalent in other faiths.”The agreement brings an end to a high-profile and controversial effort by Washington government leaders to violate one of the Catholic Church’s most sacred and inviolable directives, one that requires priests to maintain absolute secrecy over what they learn during confession or else face excommunication. Washington’s revised mandatory reporting law, passed by the state Legislature earlier this year and signed by Gov. Robert Ferguson, added clergy to the list of mandatory abuse reporters in the state. But it didn’t include an exemption for information learned in the confessional, explicitly leaving priests out of a “privileged communication” exception afforded to other professionals.The state’s bishops successfully blocked the law in federal court in July, though the threat of the statute still loomed if the state government was successful at appeal. In the July ruling, District Judge David Estudillo said there was “no question” that the law burdened the free exercise of religion.“In situations where [priests] hear confessions related to child abuse or neglect, [the rule] places them in the position of either complying with the requirements of their faith or violating the law,” the judge wrote.The state’s reversal on Oct. 10 brought cheers from religious liberty advocates, including the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represented state bishops in their suit against the state government. “Washington was wise to walk away from this draconian law and allow Catholic clergy to continue ministering to the faithful,” Becket CEO and President Mark Rienzi said. “This is a victory for religious freedom and for common sense. Priests should never be forced to make the impossible choice of betraying their sacred vows or going to jail.” Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel John Bursch on Friday said the legal advocacy group was “pleased the state agreed to swiftly restore the constitutionally protected freedom of churches and priests.” The legal group had represented Orthodox churches and a priest in their own suit. “Washington was targeting priests by compelling them to break the sacred confidentiality of confession while protecting other confidential communications, like those between attorneys and their clients. That’s rank religious discrimination,” Bursch said. On X, the Washington State Catholic Conference said that Church leaders in the state “consistently supported the law’s broader goal of strengthening protections for minors.” Church leaders “asked only for a narrow exemption to protect the sacrament of confession,” the conference said. “In every other setting other than the confessional, the Church has long supported — and continues to support — mandatory reporting,” the conference added. “We’re grateful Washington ultimately recognized it can prevent abuse without forcing priests to violate their sacred vows.”The legal fight had drawn the backing of a wide variety of supporters and backers, including the Trump administration, Bishop Robert Barron, and a global priests’ group, among numerous others.Well ahead of the law’s passage, Spokane Bishop Thomas Daly had promised Catholics in the state that priests would face prison time rather than violate the seal of confession. “I want to assure you that your shepherds, bishop and priests, are committed to keeping the seal of confession — even to the point of going to jail,” Daly told the faithful in April 2023.The Washington bishops, meanwhile, noted on Oct. 10 that the Catholic Church has upheld the sanctity of confession “for centuries.” “Priests have been imprisoned, tortured, and even killed for upholding the seal of confession,” the state Catholic conference said. “Penitents today need the same assurance that their participation in a holy sacrament will remain free from government interference.”

unitedyam

null / Credit: Brian A Jackson/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Oct 10, 2025 / 14:37 pm (CNA).

Officials in Washington state have agreed to back off a controversial effort to force priests there to violate the seal of confession as part of a mandatory abuse reporting law.

A motion filed in federal district court on Oct. 10 affirmed that state and local governments would stop attempting to require priests to report child abuse learned during the sacrament of reconciliation.

The state attorney general’s office on Oct. 10 said in a press release that clergy would remain mandatory reporters under state law, but prosecutors would agree “not to enforce reporting requirements for information clergy learn solely through confession or its equivalent in other faiths.”

The agreement brings an end to a high-profile and controversial effort by Washington government leaders to violate one of the Catholic Church’s most sacred and inviolable directives, one that requires priests to maintain absolute secrecy over what they learn during confession or else face excommunication.

Washington’s revised mandatory reporting law, passed by the state Legislature earlier this year and signed by Gov. Robert Ferguson, added clergy to the list of mandatory abuse reporters in the state. But it didn’t include an exemption for information learned in the confessional, explicitly leaving priests out of a “privileged communication” exception afforded to other professionals.

The state’s bishops successfully blocked the law in federal court in July, though the threat of the statute still loomed if the state government was successful at appeal.

In the July ruling, District Judge David Estudillo said there was “no question” that the law burdened the free exercise of religion.

“In situations where [priests] hear confessions related to child abuse or neglect, [the rule] places them in the position of either complying with the requirements of their faith or violating the law,” the judge wrote.

The state’s reversal on Oct. 10 brought cheers from religious liberty advocates, including the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represented state bishops in their suit against the state government.

“Washington was wise to walk away from this draconian law and allow Catholic clergy to continue ministering to the faithful,” Becket CEO and President Mark Rienzi said.

“This is a victory for religious freedom and for common sense. Priests should never be forced to make the impossible choice of betraying their sacred vows or going to jail.”

Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel John Bursch on Friday said the legal advocacy group was “pleased the state agreed to swiftly restore the constitutionally protected freedom of churches and priests.” The legal group had represented Orthodox churches and a priest in their own suit.

“Washington was targeting priests by compelling them to break the sacred confidentiality of confession while protecting other confidential communications, like those between attorneys and their clients. That’s rank religious discrimination,” Bursch said.

On X, the Washington State Catholic Conference said that Church leaders in the state “consistently supported the law’s broader goal of strengthening protections for minors.”

Church leaders “asked only for a narrow exemption to protect the sacrament of confession,” the conference said.

“In every other setting other than the confessional, the Church has long supported — and continues to support — mandatory reporting,” the conference added. “We’re grateful Washington ultimately recognized it can prevent abuse without forcing priests to violate their sacred vows.”

The legal fight had drawn the backing of a wide variety of supporters and backers, including the Trump administration, Bishop Robert Barron, and a global priests’ group, among numerous others.

Well ahead of the law’s passage, Spokane Bishop Thomas Daly had promised Catholics in the state that priests would face prison time rather than violate the seal of confession. “I want to assure you that your shepherds, bishop and priests, are committed to keeping the seal of confession — even to the point of going to jail,” Daly told the faithful in April 2023.

The Washington bishops, meanwhile, noted on Oct. 10 that the Catholic Church has upheld the sanctity of confession “for centuries.”

“Priests have been imprisoned, tortured, and even killed for upholding the seal of confession,” the state Catholic conference said. “Penitents today need the same assurance that their participation in a holy sacrament will remain free from government interference.”

Read More
Faith-based ministries discuss how to further pro-life mission #Catholic Kat Talalas, Amy Ford, Christopher Bell, and Sister Maria Frassati, SV, speak at the Leading with Love Conference at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 8, 2025. / Credit: Tessa Gervasini/CNA Washington, D.C., Oct 9, 2025 / 12:55 pm (CNA). Pro-life leaders from across the country gathered this week to discuss how faith-based ministries are helping to cultivate a society that promotes human dignity and how others can advance the cause.The Leading with Love Conference at The Catholic University of America (CUA) in Washington, D.C., was sponsored by the Human Life Foundation and the Center for Law and the Human Person at The Catholic University of America’s Columbus School of Law. It was aimed at “empowering Christians to cultivate a culture of life within their local communities.”Jennie Bradley Lichter, president of the March for Life Education and Defense Fund, spoke to attendees Oct. 8 about the power of faith-based ministries, including The Guadalupe Project. Lichter founded the initiative in 2022 to provide resources and encouragement to parents within the CUA community.To cultivate this encouragement, we must figure out how we can “create more of a revolution of love,” Lichter said. “Christ started this revolution of love, but it’s now up to each one of us in our particular time and place.”“Caring for unborn babies and their mothers is one of the most urgent challenges of our time, Lichter said. “Six out of 10 women who have chosen abortion would have preferred to choose life if they had the emotional and financial support they felt necessary.” The Guadalupe Project’s goal was to combat this by “[making] sure every woman on campus knows that resources exist and knows exactly how to find them,” Lichter said. “It’s meant to support all parents on campus, not just students, and not just mothers in unexpected or challenging circumstances.”“We wanted to foster a culture on campus where each life is celebrated, knowing that a positive, vibrant, and joyful culture of life is truly life-giving in so many ways,” Lichter said. The initiative “revamped all of the university’s pregnancy resource materials for students” and created “a poster campaign, including one designed specifically for the men’s dorms,” Lichter said.It also promoted the placement of stickers in every women’s restroom stall on campus with a QR code leading to these pregnancy materials. The campus started allotting more maternity and paternity leave, designating maternity parking spots on campus, providing free diapers and wipes at the campus food pantry, holding maternity clothing drives, and “affirming the goodness of family life and that new babies are a moment to celebrate,” Lichter said.The 2026 theme for the March for Life is “Life Is a Gift,” Lichter said. The initiative helps carry that out, because “life is something to be celebrated.” She added: “[Life] is not a burden for which someone needs support, or not solely that. It is really a cause for celebration.” Faith-based communities can use The Guadalupe Project as “prototype,” Lichter suggested. She shared that other universities have reached out to talk about the initiative as they were inspired to consider doing something similar.“We need to make sure that pregnant women never reach the point of despair that drives them into the arms of the abortion clinics,” Lichter said. “We need to meet that moment of loneliness, fear, or emptiness with encouragement and empowerment.”Hopes and suggestions for faith-based ministries Other leaders from prominent pro-life ministries discussed what gives them hope for the future of the pro-life movement, including Kat Talalas of Walking with Moms in Need, Amy Ford of Embrace Grace, Christopher Bell of Good Counsel Homes, and Sister Maria Frassati of the Sisters of Life.Talalas, who is the assistant director of pro-life communications for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said Walking with Moms in Need started five years ago but has already reached countless communities. The parish-based initiative is “to the point where we don’t even know a lot of the time what new diocese or parish is starting a Walking with Moms in Need, what new lives are being saved, [and] what new women are being accompanied,” Talalas said. “It’s taken on a life of its own. That’s the work of the Holy Spirit — the Holy Spirit convicting hearts.”“God guides us, we have each other, and we’re not alone. Just as we tell [mothers] that they’re not alone, we’re not alone in this movement. So what’s giving me hope is seeing the Holy Spirit catch fire and individual people saying: ‘I want to start talking with moms in need,’ and women saying: ‘I can do this,’” Talalas said. Talalas said the work all begins with prayer. “It’s sitting in the presence of the love of God, letting him love you, and seeing how the Holy Spirit convicts you … It begins with that individual conviction. If we’re not following God’s law, it doesn’t matter what we’re doing.”Ford, who leads Embrace Grace, which provides mothers support through local churches, said she has “noticed there’s a lot of people that seem like they have more of an open heart about Christianity, about spirituality … especially with the younger generation.” She added: “I think that’s something we can all have hope about.”To get involved, Ford said people need to carry out “the good works that God’s called us to do.” She posed the question: “What strengths and gifts did God put inside each of you that you can do?” While Bell’s ministry, Good Counsel, provides services including housing for homeless mothers and children and post-abortion healing services, he said every person can help by simply praying. He specifically called on people to pray in front of an abortion center. “If you have done it, do it again. If you’ve never done it, just go ... You don’t have to say anything. You didn’t have to look up. You don’t have to open your eyes. But your presence will mean the world,” Bell said. “The babies who will die there that day will know that you loved them … That’s the most important thing to do.”Sister Maria Frassati shared that “we could really grow in having more faith in what [God] is doing.”“The truth is that God is actually really working in so many ways,” she said. “God is faithful, and that really gives me a lot of hope that nothing that you give is ever wasted. Even if you walk with a woman who’s not receptive, there’s really no gift that has been offered to him that he has not kept sacred and precious in his heart.”
Read More

Faith-based ministries discuss how to further pro-life mission #Catholic Kat Talalas, Amy Ford, Christopher Bell, and Sister Maria Frassati, SV, speak at the Leading with Love Conference at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 8, 2025. / Credit: Tessa Gervasini/CNA Washington, D.C., Oct 9, 2025 / 12:55 pm (CNA). Pro-life leaders from across the country gathered this week to discuss how faith-based ministries are helping to cultivate a society that promotes human dignity and how others can advance the cause.The Leading with Love Conference at The Catholic University of America (CUA) in Washington, D.C., was sponsored by the Human Life Foundation and the Center for Law and the Human Person at The Catholic University of America’s Columbus School of Law. It was aimed at “empowering Christians to cultivate a culture of life within their local communities.”Jennie Bradley Lichter, president of the March for Life Education and Defense Fund, spoke to attendees Oct. 8 about the power of faith-based ministries, including The Guadalupe Project. Lichter founded the initiative in 2022 to provide resources and encouragement to parents within the CUA community.To cultivate this encouragement, we must figure out how we can “create more of a revolution of love,” Lichter said. “Christ started this revolution of love, but it’s now up to each one of us in our particular time and place.”“Caring for unborn babies and their mothers is one of the most urgent challenges of our time, Lichter said. “Six out of 10 women who have chosen abortion would have preferred to choose life if they had the emotional and financial support they felt necessary.” The Guadalupe Project’s goal was to combat this by “[making] sure every woman on campus knows that resources exist and knows exactly how to find them,” Lichter said. “It’s meant to support all parents on campus, not just students, and not just mothers in unexpected or challenging circumstances.”“We wanted to foster a culture on campus where each life is celebrated, knowing that a positive, vibrant, and joyful culture of life is truly life-giving in so many ways,” Lichter said. The initiative “revamped all of the university’s pregnancy resource materials for students” and created “a poster campaign, including one designed specifically for the men’s dorms,” Lichter said.It also promoted the placement of stickers in every women’s restroom stall on campus with a QR code leading to these pregnancy materials. The campus started allotting more maternity and paternity leave, designating maternity parking spots on campus, providing free diapers and wipes at the campus food pantry, holding maternity clothing drives, and “affirming the goodness of family life and that new babies are a moment to celebrate,” Lichter said.The 2026 theme for the March for Life is “Life Is a Gift,” Lichter said. The initiative helps carry that out, because “life is something to be celebrated.” She added: “[Life] is not a burden for which someone needs support, or not solely that. It is really a cause for celebration.” Faith-based communities can use The Guadalupe Project as “prototype,” Lichter suggested. She shared that other universities have reached out to talk about the initiative as they were inspired to consider doing something similar.“We need to make sure that pregnant women never reach the point of despair that drives them into the arms of the abortion clinics,” Lichter said. “We need to meet that moment of loneliness, fear, or emptiness with encouragement and empowerment.”Hopes and suggestions for faith-based ministries Other leaders from prominent pro-life ministries discussed what gives them hope for the future of the pro-life movement, including Kat Talalas of Walking with Moms in Need, Amy Ford of Embrace Grace, Christopher Bell of Good Counsel Homes, and Sister Maria Frassati of the Sisters of Life.Talalas, who is the assistant director of pro-life communications for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said Walking with Moms in Need started five years ago but has already reached countless communities. The parish-based initiative is “to the point where we don’t even know a lot of the time what new diocese or parish is starting a Walking with Moms in Need, what new lives are being saved, [and] what new women are being accompanied,” Talalas said. “It’s taken on a life of its own. That’s the work of the Holy Spirit — the Holy Spirit convicting hearts.”“God guides us, we have each other, and we’re not alone. Just as we tell [mothers] that they’re not alone, we’re not alone in this movement. So what’s giving me hope is seeing the Holy Spirit catch fire and individual people saying: ‘I want to start talking with moms in need,’ and women saying: ‘I can do this,’” Talalas said. Talalas said the work all begins with prayer. “It’s sitting in the presence of the love of God, letting him love you, and seeing how the Holy Spirit convicts you … It begins with that individual conviction. If we’re not following God’s law, it doesn’t matter what we’re doing.”Ford, who leads Embrace Grace, which provides mothers support through local churches, said she has “noticed there’s a lot of people that seem like they have more of an open heart about Christianity, about spirituality … especially with the younger generation.” She added: “I think that’s something we can all have hope about.”To get involved, Ford said people need to carry out “the good works that God’s called us to do.” She posed the question: “What strengths and gifts did God put inside each of you that you can do?” While Bell’s ministry, Good Counsel, provides services including housing for homeless mothers and children and post-abortion healing services, he said every person can help by simply praying. He specifically called on people to pray in front of an abortion center. “If you have done it, do it again. If you’ve never done it, just go … You don’t have to say anything. You didn’t have to look up. You don’t have to open your eyes. But your presence will mean the world,” Bell said. “The babies who will die there that day will know that you loved them … That’s the most important thing to do.”Sister Maria Frassati shared that “we could really grow in having more faith in what [God] is doing.”“The truth is that God is actually really working in so many ways,” she said. “God is faithful, and that really gives me a lot of hope that nothing that you give is ever wasted. Even if you walk with a woman who’s not receptive, there’s really no gift that has been offered to him that he has not kept sacred and precious in his heart.”

unitedyam

Kat Talalas, Amy Ford, Christopher Bell, and Sister Maria Frassati, SV, speak at the Leading with Love Conference at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 8, 2025. / Credit: Tessa Gervasini/CNA

Washington, D.C., Oct 9, 2025 / 12:55 pm (CNA).

Pro-life leaders from across the country gathered this week to discuss how faith-based ministries are helping to cultivate a society that promotes human dignity and how others can advance the cause.

The Leading with Love Conference at The Catholic University of America (CUA) in Washington, D.C., was sponsored by the Human Life Foundation and the Center for Law and the Human Person at The Catholic University of America’s Columbus School of Law. It was aimed at “empowering Christians to cultivate a culture of life within their local communities.”

Jennie Bradley Lichter, president of the March for Life Education and Defense Fund, spoke to attendees Oct. 8 about the power of faith-based ministries, including The Guadalupe Project. Lichter founded the initiative in 2022 to provide resources and encouragement to parents within the CUA community.

To cultivate this encouragement, we must figure out how we can “create more of a revolution of love,” Lichter said. “Christ started this revolution of love, but it’s now up to each one of us in our particular time and place.”

“Caring for unborn babies and their mothers is one of the most urgent challenges of our time, Lichter said. “Six out of 10 women who have chosen abortion would have preferred to choose life if they had the emotional and financial support they felt necessary.” 

The Guadalupe Project’s goal was to combat this by “[making] sure every woman on campus knows that resources exist and knows exactly how to find them,” Lichter said. “It’s meant to support all parents on campus, not just students, and not just mothers in unexpected or challenging circumstances.”

“We wanted to foster a culture on campus where each life is celebrated, knowing that a positive, vibrant, and joyful culture of life is truly life-giving in so many ways,” Lichter said.

The initiative “revamped all of the university’s pregnancy resource materials for students” and created “a poster campaign, including one designed specifically for the men’s dorms,” Lichter said.

It also promoted the placement of stickers in every women’s restroom stall on campus with a QR code leading to these pregnancy materials. The campus started allotting more maternity and paternity leave, designating maternity parking spots on campus, providing free diapers and wipes at the campus food pantry, holding maternity clothing drives, and “affirming the goodness of family life and that new babies are a moment to celebrate,” Lichter said.

The 2026 theme for the March for Life is “Life Is a Gift,” Lichter said. The initiative helps carry that out, because “life is something to be celebrated.”

She added: “[Life] is not a burden for which someone needs support, or not solely that. It is really a cause for celebration.” 

Faith-based communities can use The Guadalupe Project as “prototype,” Lichter suggested. She shared that other universities have reached out to talk about the initiative as they were inspired to consider doing something similar.

“We need to make sure that pregnant women never reach the point of despair that drives them into the arms of the abortion clinics,” Lichter said. “We need to meet that moment of loneliness, fear, or emptiness with encouragement and empowerment.”

Hopes and suggestions for faith-based ministries 

Other leaders from prominent pro-life ministries discussed what gives them hope for the future of the pro-life movement, including Kat Talalas of Walking with Moms in Need, Amy Ford of Embrace Grace, Christopher Bell of Good Counsel Homes, and Sister Maria Frassati of the Sisters of Life.

Talalas, who is the assistant director of pro-life communications for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said Walking with Moms in Need started five years ago but has already reached countless communities. 

The parish-based initiative is “to the point where we don’t even know a lot of the time what new diocese or parish is starting a Walking with Moms in Need, what new lives are being saved, [and] what new women are being accompanied,” Talalas said. “It’s taken on a life of its own. That’s the work of the Holy Spirit — the Holy Spirit convicting hearts.”

“God guides us, we have each other, and we’re not alone. Just as we tell [mothers] that they’re not alone, we’re not alone in this movement. So what’s giving me hope is seeing the Holy Spirit catch fire and individual people saying: ‘I want to start talking with moms in need,’ and women saying: ‘I can do this,’” Talalas said. 

Talalas said the work all begins with prayer. “It’s sitting in the presence of the love of God, letting him love you, and seeing how the Holy Spirit convicts you … It begins with that individual conviction. If we’re not following God’s law, it doesn’t matter what we’re doing.”

Ford, who leads Embrace Grace, which provides mothers support through local churches, said she has “noticed there’s a lot of people that seem like they have more of an open heart about Christianity, about spirituality … especially with the younger generation.”

She added: “I think that’s something we can all have hope about.”

To get involved, Ford said people need to carry out “the good works that God’s called us to do.” She posed the question: “What strengths and gifts did God put inside each of you that you can do?” 

While Bell’s ministry, Good Counsel, provides services including housing for homeless mothers and children and post-abortion healing services, he said every person can help by simply praying. He specifically called on people to pray in front of an abortion center. 

“If you have done it, do it again. If you’ve never done it, just go … You don’t have to say anything. You didn’t have to look up. You don’t have to open your eyes. But your presence will mean the world,” Bell said. “The babies who will die there that day will know that you loved them … That’s the most important thing to do.”

Sister Maria Frassati shared that “we could really grow in having more faith in what [God] is doing.”

“The truth is that God is actually really working in so many ways,” she said. “God is faithful, and that really gives me a lot of hope that nothing that you give is ever wasted. Even if you walk with a woman who’s not receptive, there’s really no gift that has been offered to him that he has not kept sacred and precious in his heart.”

Read More
High Court weighs free speech in Colorado’s law banning counseling on gender identity
Read More

High Court weighs free speech in Colorado’s law banning counseling on gender identity

unitedyam

null / Credit: Wolfgang Schaller|Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 8, 2025 / 10:00 am (CNA).

The U.S. Supreme Court during oral arguments on Oct. 7 scrutinized Colorado’s law banning counseling on gender identity with some justices voicing concern about possible viewpoint discrimination and free speech restrictions embedded in the statute.

Colorado Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson defended the law, which prohibits licensed psychologists and therapists from engaging in any efforts that it considers “conversion therapy” when treating minors. It does not apply to parents, members of the clergy, or others.

Nearly half of U.S. states have a similar ban. The Supreme Court ruling on this matter could set nationwide precedent on the legality of such laws. 

The Colorado law defines “conversion therapy” as treatments designed to change a person’s “sexual orientation or gender identity,” including changes to “behaviors or gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attraction or feelings toward individuals of the same sex” even if the minor and his or her family has requested that care.

Under the law, permitted therapy includes “acceptance, support, and understanding” of a minor’s self-asserted transgender identity or same-sex attraction.

The law is being challenged by Kaley Chiles, a Christian counselor who provides faith-based counseling to clients with gender dysphoria and same-sex attraction.

Free speech and viewpoint discrimination

Stevenson argued that Colorado’s law is not a speech restriction but instead a regulation on a specific type of “treatment,” saying that regulations cannot cease to apply “just because they are using words.”

“That treatment does not work and carries great risk of harm,” Stevenson said, referring to the practices the state considers to be “conversion therapy.”

She argued that health care has been “heavily regulated since the beginning of our country” and compared “conversion therapy” to doctors providing improper advice on how to treat a condition. She claimed this therapy falsely asserts “you can change this innate thing about yourself.”

“The client and the patient [are] expecting accurate information,” Stevenson said.

Justice Samuel Alito told Stevenson the law sounds like “blatant viewpoint discrimination,” noting that a minor can receive talk therapy welcoming homosexual inclinations but cannot access therapy to reduce those urges. He said it is a restriction “based on the viewpoint expressed.”

Alito said the state’s position is “a minor should not be able to obtain talk therapy to overcome same-sex attraction [even] if that’s what he wants.”

Stevenson argued Colorado is not engaged in viewpoint discrimination and said: “Counseling is an evidence-based practice.” She said it would be wrong to suggest lawmakers “reach[ed] this conclusion based on anything other than protection of minors.”

“There is no other motive going on to suppress viewpoint or expression,” Stevenson said.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Justice Neil Gorsuch asked questions about how to handle issues where medical disagreement exists.

Gorsuch noted, for example, that homosexuality was historically viewed as a mental disorder and asked Stevenson whether it would have been legal for states to ban therapy that affirmed a person’s homosexuality at that time. Stevenson argued that at that time, it would have been legal.

Banning ‘voluntary conversations’

Alliance Defending Freedom Chief Counsel Jim Campbell argued on behalf of Chiles and her counseling services, telling the justices his client offers “voluntary speech between a licensed professional and a minor,” and the law bans “voluntary conversations.”

Campbell noted that if one of her minor clients says, “I would like help realigning my identity with my sex,” then the law requires that Chiles “has to deny them.”

“Kids and families that want this kind of help … are being left without any kind of support,” he added, warning that Chiles, her clients, and potential clients are suffering irreparable harm if access to this treatment continues to be denied.

Campbell argued that “many people have experienced life-changing benefits from this kind of counseling,” many of whom are seeking to “align their life with their religion” and improve their “relationship with God.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor contested whether the issue was about free speech, noting Colorado pointed to studies that such therapy efforts “harm the child … emotionally and physically.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson similarly objected to the claim, questioning whether a counselor acting in her professional capacity “is really expressing … a message for a First Amendment purposes.” She said treatment is different than writing an article about conversion therapy or giving a speech about it.

Campbell disagreed, arguing: “This involves a conversation,” and “a one-on-one conversation is a form of speech.” He said Chiles is “discussing concepts of identity and behaviors and attraction” and simply helping her clients “achieve their goals.”

Read More
Report: Abortion declines even in states where it is still legal
Read More

Report: Abortion declines even in states where it is still legal

unitedyam

null / Credit: Mike Blackburn via Flickr (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

CNA Staff, Oct 3, 2025 / 10:30 am (CNA).

Here is a roundup of recent pro-life and abortion-related news.

Abortion declines even in states where it is still legal

The number of abortions in clinics in pro-abortion states saw a decline in the first half of 2025, according to a recent report.

The report by the pro-abortion group Guttmacher found a 5% decrease in abortions provided by clinics from for the same period in 2024.

The review found declines in clinician-provided abortions in 22 states, all states that did not have “abortion bans.” The report also found an 8% decline in out-of-state travel for abortion to states with fewer protections for unborn children.

States with protections for unborn children at six weeks, such as Florida and Iowa, also saw a decline in abortions so far this year.

The report did not take mail-in or telehealth abortion pill numbers into account.

Michael New, a professor at the Busch School of Business at The Catholic University of America and a scholar at Charlotte Lozier Institute, called the report “good news” but noted that the survey wasn’t “comprehensive.”

“It does not appear that Guttmacher collects data on telehealth abortions from states where strong pro-life laws are in effect but abortion is not banned,” he told CNA. “Pro-lifers should take these figures with a grain of salt.”

In terms of mail-in, telehealth abortions, New noted that pro-lifers should “continue to push for more timely action to protect mothers and preborn children.”

“The Trump administration is within its power to halt telehealth abortions,” he said, noting that “Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy  Jr. recently said the FDA would conduct a new review of abortion pills.”

Florida’s Heartbeat Act, which took effect in May 2024, played “a large role in this decline,” New said.

“The Heartbeat Act is protecting preborn children in Florida and is preventing women from other states from obtaining abortions in the Sunshine State,” he said. “Birth data from Florida shows that the Heartbeat Act is saving nearly 300 lives every month.”

Government takes action against Virginia school system following alleged abortions for students

The U.S. Department of Education has called on a Virginia public school system to investigate reports that high school staff facilitated abortions for students without their parents’ knowledge. 

The department took action against Fairfax County Public Schools under the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendments, according to a Sept. 29 press release.

The investigation follows reports that a Centreville High School social worker scheduled and paid for an abortion for a minor and pressured a second student to have an abortion. The federal agency is requiring that Fairfax investigate whether this practice has continued. 

The Fairfax report “shocks the conscience,” the department’s acting general counsel, Candice Jackson, said in a statement.

“Children do not belong to the government — decisions touching deeply-held values should be made within loving families,” Jackson said. “It is both morally unconscionable and patently illegal for school officials to keep parents in the dark about such intimate, life-altering procedures pertaining to their children.” 

Jackson said the Trump administration will “take swift and decisive action” to “restore parental authority.”

Virginia bishop speaks out against potential ‘abortion rights’ amendment

Bishop Michael Burbidge of Arlington, Virginia, this week spoke out against a proposed amendment to create a right to abortion in the Virginia Constitution. 

“While the amendment is not yet on the ballot, the outcome of this fall’s elections will determine whether it advances or is halted,” he said in an October “Respect Life Month” message. 

“If adopted, this amendment would embed in our state constitution a purported right to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy with no age limits,” he said.

He noted that Virginia has “some modest protections” for life, but “the proposed amendment would likely make it impossible … to pass similar protective laws in the future.”

Protections for unborn children, for parental consent, and for conscience rights “would be severely jeopardized under this amendment,” he added.

“Parents have the sacred right to be involved in the most serious decisions facing their daughters,” Burbidge said. “No one should ever be forced to participate in or pay for an abortion.” 

“Most importantly, the lives of vulnerable women and their unborn children are sacred and must be welcomed and protected,” he said.

He called on Catholics to not “remain silent,” urging the faithful to inform themselves and others about “the devastating impact this amendment would have.”

“Our faith compels us to stand firmly for life, in prayer and witness, and also in advocacy and action,” he said.

“We must speak with clarity and compassion in the public square, reminding our legislators and neighbors that true justice is measured by how we treat the most defenseless among us,” he concluded.

Planned Parenthood closes its only 2 clinics in Louisiana

The only two Planned Parenthood locations in Louisiana closed this week following the Trump administration’s decision to halt federal funding for abortion providers for a year.  

The president of Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast cited “political attacks” as the reason for the closures of the two facilities located in Baton Rouge and New Orleans. 

The closures follow a court ruling last month enforcing the Trump administration’s defunding of Planned Parenthood, which halted government funding for abortion providers.

Louisiana authorities issue arrest warrant for California abortionist 

Louisiana authorities issued an arrest warrant for a California doctor for allegedly providing abortion drugs to a woman without consulting her. 

The woman, Rosalie Markezich, said she felt coerced into the abortion by her boyfriend at the time, who arranged for an abortionist in California to prescribe drugs to induce a chemical abortion.

The same abortionist, Remy Coeytaux, has faced charges for telehealth abortions after the abortionist allegedly sent abortion pills to Texas, where they are illegal.

Read More
Christian photographer wins lawsuit against Louisville over same-sex discrimination rule
Read More

Christian photographer wins lawsuit against Louisville over same-sex discrimination rule

unitedyam

Photographer holding camera against newlywed couple. / Credit: Vectorfusionart/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 3, 2025 / 09:30 am (CNA).

A federal court awarded nominal damages to a Christian photographer after the city government of Louisville, Kentucky, sought to enforce an anti-discrimination ordinance that could have forced her to provide photography services for same-sex civil weddings.

Judge Benjamin Beaton found that Louisville’s Fairness Ordinance contained “two provisions” that limited the expression of Christian wedding photographer Chelsey Nelson, who sought $1 in damages. The court awarded Nelson the requested damages. 

According to the ruling, the ordinance prohibited “the denial of goods and services to members of protected classes,” which includes people with same-sex attraction. 

The publication provision of the ordinance also prevented her “from writing and publishing any indication or explanation that she wouldn’t photograph same-sex weddings, or that otherwise causes someone to feel unwelcome or undesirable based on his or her sexual orientation or gender identity.” 

Both provisions, Beaton ruled, “limit Nelson’s freedom to express her beliefs about marriage.”

The court stated Nelson “suffered a First Amendment injury” because she decided to limit the promotion of her business, ignore opportunities posted online, refrain from advertising to grow her business, and censored herself, which was done to avoid prosecution.

“The government can’t force Americans to say things they don’t believe, and state officials have paid and will continue to pay a price when they violate this foundational freedom,” Nelson said in a statement through her attorneys at Alliance Defending Freedom following the ruling.

“The freedom to speak without fear of censorship is a God-given constitutionally guaranteed right,” she added.

In his ruling, Beaton noted the Supreme Court set nationwide precedent when it ruled on 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis. In that decision, the court ruled a Colorado law violated a web designer’s First Amendment rights because it would have forced him to design websites for same-sex civil weddings in spite of his religious beliefs.

Beaton wrote that in spite of the Supreme Court precedent, “Louisville apparently still ‘actively enforces’ the ordinance … [and] still won’t concede that the First Amendment protects Nelson from compelled expression.” 

His ruling noted that the mayor publicly stated that he would keep enforcing the ordinance, including against Nelson, after the 303 Creative decision.

Although the city’s lawyers argued in court that the city did not intend to enforce the law against Nelson, Beaton wrote: “Nothing in Louisville’s informal disavowal would prevent the city from making good on that promise [to enforce the rule against Nelson] tomorrow.”

“Anyone who’s tussled with the city’s lawyers this long and who continues to do business in and around Louisville might reasonably look askance at the city’s assurances that enforcement is unlikely,” Beaton wrote in his ruling.

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Bryan Neihart said in a statement that “free speech is for everyone” and the precedent set in 303 Creative ensures that Americans “have the freedom to express and create messages that align with their beliefs without fear of government punishment.”

“For over five years, Louisville officials said they could force Chelsey to promote views about marriage that violated her religious beliefs,” he said. 

“But the First Amendment leaves decisions about what to say with the people, not the government. The district court’s decision rests on this bedrock First Amendment principle and builds on the victory in 303 Creative.”

Read More