New York and California are pouring taxpayer dollars into Planned Parenthood, joining several other states in counteracting the federal defunding of the abortion giant. / Credit: Jonathan Weiss/Shutterstock
CNA Staff, Oct 25, 2025 / 10:00 am (CNA).
New York and California are pouring taxpayer dollars into Planned Parenthood, joining several other states in counteracting the federal defunding of the abortion giant.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom pledged $140 million to Planned Parenthood locations in California on Oct. 24. On the same day, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul committed $35 million in funding to Planned Parenthood locations in New York.
Both states are known for their abortion shield laws, which protect abortionists who mail abortion pills into states where they are illegal. Several women are suing California and New York abortionists after being poisoned by or coerced into taking the abortion pill by the fathers of their children.
New York and California join several other states that have made similar moves in light of the yearlong federal defunding of Planned Parenthood. Colorado, Massachusetts, and Washington have all taken similar steps to replace lost federal funding for Planned Parenthood over the past few months.
Newsom said on Thursday that California is “protecting access to essential health care” by providing funding for more than 100 locations across the state.
“Trump’s efforts to defund Planned Parenthood put all our communities at risk as people seek basic health care from these community providers,” Newsom said in a statement.
Hochul in a similar vein said she is putting funding toward the 47 Planned Parenthood clinics in New York, alleging that pro-life politicians will “stop at nothing to undermine women’s health care.”
“In the face of congressional Republicans voting to defund Planned Parenthood, I’ve directed the state to fund these vital services, protecting access to health care that thousands of New Yorkers rely on,” Hochul said in a Friday statement.
Hundreds of alternative clinics exist in both states
A spokeswoman for Heartbeat International, a network that supports life-affirming pregnancy centers, told CNA there are many low-cost and even free alternatives to Planned Parenthood across the country — including hundreds of clinics and pregnancy centers in both New York and California.
Andrea Trudden said that “women in California and New York already have access to a vast network of life-affirming care.”
“California has more than 300 pregnancy help organizations and New York nearly 200,” Trudden said, citing Heartbeat International’s Worldwide Directory of Pregnancy Help.
“These centers offer practical support, compassionate care, and resources to women facing unplanned pregnancies, empowering them to choose life for their children and themselves,” she continued.
For women who need health care not related to pregnancy, Trudden noted that both states are “well served” by Federally Qualified Health Centers, which are centers that provide “comprehensive, low-cost medical care for women and families.”
As of 2024, California had more than 170 of these clinics, while New York had more than 60, Trudden said, citing a report by KFF, a health policy institute.
“If leaders truly cared about women’s health, they would invest in these community-based organizations that meet the needs of women before, during, and after pregnancy — not in the nation’s largest abortion provider,” Trudden added.
Kelsey Pritchard, a spokeswoman at Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, told CNA that in California, Planned Parenthood “is choosing to shutter primary care rather than give up profiting from abortions.”
In Orange and San Bernardino counties, Planned Parenthood will continue to offer abortions while closing primary care facilities.
“In California, New York, and across the country, Planned Parenthoods are outnumbered by far better options and the pro-life movement is happy to help women locate the care they need,” Pritchard said, citing reports by the Charlotte Lozier Institute on community care centers and pregnancy centers for women.
Jennie Bradley Lichter, the president of the March for Life, criticized politicians for prioritizing abortion funding instead of care for women and children.
“Political leaders who prioritize funding for Planned Parenthood leave no doubt where their priorities lie: and it is not with women and children,” Bradley Lichter told CNA.
“It’s a shame that the leaders of states like California and New York aren’t choosing to pour their resources into institutions that truly support moms, like the huge number of pregnancy resource centers located in each of those states,” she said.
Women deserve better than the “tragedy” of abortion, Bradley Lichter said.
“We at March for Life want women to know that when their state leaders fall short and leave them in the hands of Big Abortion, pro-life Americans will stand in the gap and help them find the love and care they need,” she continued.
Defunding Planned Parenthood: a ‘life-saving’ act
A spokesman for Live Action called the defunding of Planned Parenthood “one of the most lifesaving acts Congress has taken in decades,” noting that the federal government stopped funding the organization that “kills over 400,000 children every year.”
“That victory must be made permanent when the one-year cutoff expires next July,” Noah Brandt told CNA. “Yet pro-abortion states like California and New York are working to undo that progress, using taxpayer money to expand abortion through all nine months and to ship abortion pills nationwide.”
“Federal funding for Planned Parenthood must never return, and states that promote abortion should be held accountable for enabling the mass killing and sterilization of American children,” Brandt said.
Pritchard added that although Planned Parenthood is “constantly scheming to grow their grip on taxpayer money,” the pro-life movement has seen wins around the nation — most especially, the federal defunding of Planned Parenthood.
“Make no mistake, they are losing big in Congress, in courts, and increasingly in the hearts and minds of Americans,” Pritchard said.
Read More![Alabama executes man by nitrogen gas after Supreme Court denies request for firing squad #Catholic
The state of Alabama on Oct. 23, 2025, executed convicted murderer Anthony Boyd by nitrogen gas just hours after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to consider requiring the state to execute him by firing squad instead. / Credit: Alabama Department of Corrections via AP, File
CNA Staff, Oct 24, 2025 / 11:32 am (CNA).
The state of Alabama on Thursday executed convicted murderer Anthony Boyd by nitrogen gas just hours after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to consider requiring the state to execute him by firing squad instead.Boyd reportedly took around 20 minutes to die from the execution method, according to the Associated Press. The news wire said he “clenched his fist, raised his head off the gurney slightly, and began shaking,” after which he became still but continued with a series of “heaving breaths” for “at least 15 minutes.”The Alabama man was convicted of capital murder in the 1993 killing of Gregory Huguley in Talladega County. Huguley was taped up, doused with gasoline, and set on fire. Boyd proclaimed his innocence until the last minutes of his life. “I didn’t kill anybody. I didn’t participate in killing anybody,” he said on Oct. 23 prior to being executed. The protracted execution came on the same day that the U.S. Supreme Court refused to consider whether the execution by nitrogen gas violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. Nitrogen gas is a relatively new execution method in the U.S. In January 2024 Alabama executed Kenneth Smith with gas, the first time in U.S. history that such a method was used. Witnesses said Smith writhed for several minutes while being administered the gas and was observed breathing for a considerable amount of time during the execution itself. Advocates have warned that the process is drawn-out and painful for victims of execution. Boyd had asked the U.S. Supreme Court to consider requiring Alabama to execute him by firing squad. The Supreme Court declined to consider the case.In a scathing dissent ahead of the execution, Justice Sonia Sotomayor accused the high court of “turn[ing] its back” on Boyd and on the Constitution. Sotomayor, who was joined by Justice Elena Kagan and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, pointed to several other executions by nitrogen gas, including Kenneth Smith’s, noting reports that inmates have been seen “violent[ly] convulsing, eyes bulging, [and] thrashing against the restraints” while they are killed. All condemned prisoners suffer “distress” ahead of their executions, Sotomayor said. But drawn-out methods of execution like that of nitrogen gas create suffering “after the execution begins and while it is being carried out to completion.”Prisoners are not guaranteed a painless death under the Eighth Amendment, Sotomayor acknowledged.“But when a state introduces an experimental method of execution that superadds psychological terror as a necessary feature of its successful completion, courts should enforce the Eighth Amendment’s mandate against cruel and unusual punishment,” she said.Ahead of Boyd’s execution, the anti-death penalty group Catholic Mobilizing Network said capital punishment “remind[s] us how critically important it is that we include the abolition of the death penalty in our respect life advocacy.”“May we see the dignity of [Boyd] and of every individual sentenced to death, remembering always that no person is defined by the worst thing they’ve ever done,” the group said.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/alabama-executes-man-by-nitrogen-gas-after-supreme-court-denies-request-for-firing-squad-catholic-the-state-of-alabama-on-oct-23-2025-executed-convicted-murderer-anthony-boyd-by-nitrogen-gas-j.webp)
![Native American group loses religious freedom appeal at Supreme Court #Catholic
On Oct. 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a rehearing of the case filed by Apache Stronghold, a coalition of Native Americans and their supporters, that would have prevented the sale of a Native American sacred site to a mining company. / Credit: Photo courtesy of Becket
CNA Staff, Oct 8, 2025 / 12:00 pm (CNA).
A Native American group working to stop the destruction of a centuries-old religious ritual site has lost a last-ditch appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the transfer and obliteration of the Arizona parcel.The Supreme Court in an unsigned order on Oct. 6 said Apache Stronghold’s petition for a rehearing had been denied. The court did not give a reason for the denial.Justice Neil Gorsuch would have granted the request, the order noted. Justice Samuel Alito, meanwhile, “took no part in the consideration or decision” of the order. The denial likely deals a death blow to the Apache group’s attempts to halt the destruction of Oak Flat, which has been viewed as a sacred site by Apaches and other Native American groups for hundreds of years and has been used extensively for religious rituals. The federal government is selling the land to the multinational Resolution Copper company, which plans to destroy the site as part of a copper mining operation. The coalition had brought the lawsuit to the Supreme Court earlier this year under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, arguing that the sale of the site would violate the decades-old federal statute restricting the government’s ability to encroach on religious liberty. The high court in May refused to hear the case. Gorsuch dissented from that decision as well, arguing that the court “should at least have troubled itself to hear [the] case” before “allowing the government to destroy the Apaches’ sacred site.”Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the May ruling as well, though he did not add his dissent to the Oct. 6 denial of the appeal. In a statement, Apache Stronghold said that while the decision was "deeply disappointing, the fight to protect Oak Flat is far from over." The group vowed to "continue pressing our cases in the lower courts.""Oak Flat deserves the same respect and protection this country has long given to other places of worship," the group said. The coalition has garnered support from major Catholic backers in its religious liberty bid. Last year the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops joined an amicus brief arguing that lower court decisions allowing the sale of Oak Flat represent “a grave misunderstanding” of religious freedom law. The Knights of Columbus similarly filed a brief in support of the Apaches, arguing that the decision to allow the property to be mined applies an “atextual constraint” to the federal religious freedom law with “no grounding in the statute itself.”Though Apache Stronghold appears to have exhausted its legal options, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit said on Aug. 18 that the Oak Flat site would not be transferred to Resolution Copper amid emergency petitions from the San Carlos Apache Tribe as well as the Arizona Mining Reform Coalition. That dispute is still playing out at federal court.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/native-american-group-loses-religious-freedom-appeal-at-supreme-court-catholic-on-oct-6-2025-the-u-s-supreme-court-denied-a-rehearing-of-the-case-filed-by-apache-stronghold-a-coalition-of-na.webp)
