Democracy

U.S. Catholic bishops urge ‘fair representation’ on Voting Rights Act anniversary #Catholic A subcommittee of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) urged policymakers to protect “fair representation” in elections ahead of the 61st anniversary of President Lyndon B. Johnson signing the Voting Rights Act of 1965.“The Voting Rights Act of 1965 emerged from the sacrifices and perseverance of countless individuals who worked to secure the fundamental right to vote, particularly for communities of color that had long faced discrimination and exclusion,” said Bishop Daniel E. Garcia, chair of the USCCB Subcommittee for the Promotion of Racial Justice and Reconciliation.The USCCB issued the statement on Aug. 5, one day before the anniversary. The Voting Rights Act was enacted to combat Jim Crow laws that were designed to disenfranchise Black Americans.“For decades, the U.S. bishops have advocated for the right of eligible citizens to participate fully in public life, including the protection of voting rights,” said Garcia, bishop of Austin, Texas. “We encourage all citizens to exercise their right to vote and urge policymakers to safeguard voting rights and promote fair representation for all.”“Today is also an occasion to remember the hard-won history of voting rights in our country, and to recommit to the work which remains,” he added.Garcia also said in his statement that “today, many communities of color worry about how recent developments will impact their fair representation and future participation in the democratic process.”Recent developments could affect fair district maps, equal representation, and long‑term participation in elections. One development includes a 2013 Supreme Court decision, which ruled unconstitutional a provision of the Voting Rights Act that required certain states to obtain federal approval to change voting laws if that state had a history of disenfranchising voters.Another development included a 2020 ruling that upheld Arizona election laws that required voters to cast ballots in their assigned precincts and banned people from submitting another person’s ballot (unless that person is a family or household member).Rulings in 2023 and 2026 addressed racial gerrymandering, which is illegal under the Voting Rights Act. The 2023 ruling found a 2023 Alabama congressional district map to be illegal for not having any Black-majority districts and the 2026 ruling struck down Louisiana maps for relying too much on race in crafting districts.Although racial gerrymandering is illegal, federal law does not prohibit partisan gerrymandering.Garcia quoted Pope Leo XIV’s encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, saying the bishops “affirm the value of democracy ‘insofar as it guarantees the effective participation of citizens’ as a reflection of their dignity.”“May we continue to work together for the common good and for a society in which all citizens are able to participate fully and faithfully in our democracy,” Garcia said.
Read More

U.S. Catholic bishops urge ‘fair representation’ on Voting Rights Act anniversary #Catholic A subcommittee of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) urged policymakers to protect “fair representation” in elections ahead of the 61st anniversary of President Lyndon B. Johnson signing the Voting Rights Act of 1965.“The Voting Rights Act of 1965 emerged from the sacrifices and perseverance of countless individuals who worked to secure the fundamental right to vote, particularly for communities of color that had long faced discrimination and exclusion,” said Bishop Daniel E. Garcia, chair of the USCCB Subcommittee for the Promotion of Racial Justice and Reconciliation.The USCCB issued the statement on Aug. 5, one day before the anniversary. The Voting Rights Act was enacted to combat Jim Crow laws that were designed to disenfranchise Black Americans.“For decades, the U.S. bishops have advocated for the right of eligible citizens to participate fully in public life, including the protection of voting rights,” said Garcia, bishop of Austin, Texas. “We encourage all citizens to exercise their right to vote and urge policymakers to safeguard voting rights and promote fair representation for all.”“Today is also an occasion to remember the hard-won history of voting rights in our country, and to recommit to the work which remains,” he added.Garcia also said in his statement that “today, many communities of color worry about how recent developments will impact their fair representation and future participation in the democratic process.”Recent developments could affect fair district maps, equal representation, and long‑term participation in elections. One development includes a 2013 Supreme Court decision, which ruled unconstitutional a provision of the Voting Rights Act that required certain states to obtain federal approval to change voting laws if that state had a history of disenfranchising voters.Another development included a 2020 ruling that upheld Arizona election laws that required voters to cast ballots in their assigned precincts and banned people from submitting another person’s ballot (unless that person is a family or household member).Rulings in 2023 and 2026 addressed racial gerrymandering, which is illegal under the Voting Rights Act. The 2023 ruling found a 2023 Alabama congressional district map to be illegal for not having any Black-majority districts and the 2026 ruling struck down Louisiana maps for relying too much on race in crafting districts.Although racial gerrymandering is illegal, federal law does not prohibit partisan gerrymandering.Garcia quoted Pope Leo XIV’s encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, saying the bishops “affirm the value of democracy ‘insofar as it guarantees the effective participation of citizens’ as a reflection of their dignity.”“May we continue to work together for the common good and for a society in which all citizens are able to participate fully and faithfully in our democracy,” Garcia said.

unitedyam

Bishop Daniel E. Garcia said the Voting Rights Act was born from the sacrifice of those who fought to secure equal access to the ballot, especially for communities of color long denied that right.

Read More
France legalizes euthanasia after forceful push through Parliament #Catholic The French National Assembly gave final approval on July 15 to a bill legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, making France one of the few European countries to legalize the practice along with Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Spain. The 291-241 vote came three years after President Emmanuel Macron, who had made it one of his key campaign promises, first opened the question to national debate.The vote ended an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate. Members of the National Assembly passed the bill three times over the course of 14 months — most recently on June 30 by a vote of 295 to 232 — and senators rejected it just as many times. On July 7, the Senate passed, by a narrow majority of 169 to 164, with 11 abstentions, a preliminary motion to outright reject the bill rather than debate it, and this motion itself called on the government to end the legislative process. Rather than heeding this call, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu invoked Article 45 of the Constitution, which allows the government to give the National Assembly the final say when repeated readings fail to produce an agreement between the two chambers. He then referred the bill back to the National Assembly for a fourth and final vote instead of a fourth reading in the Senate.The July 15 vote, however, did not close the matter. On July 14, Lecornu announced he would refer part of the text to the Constitutional Council, a step Senate President Gérard Larcher had also urged, citing in particular how the billʼs conscience clause would interact with health and social care facilities built around end-of-life accompaniment that exclude assisted dying. The council must rule within a month, or eight days if the government asks for an expedited review, meaning the law cannot be promulgated until that review is complete even though the Assembly has now adopted it.The end-of-life law covers both euthanasia, administered by a doctor or nurse, and assisted suicide, in which the patient self-administers a lethal substance, under five cumulative conditions: A person must be an adult, a stable resident of France, diagnosed with a serious and incurable condition, in an advanced or terminal phase of that condition, and suffering in a way current treatment cannot relieve, while remaining able to express a free and informed decision. Self-administration is supposed to be the default rule, with the law providing for intervention by a healthcare professional only when the patient is physically unable to act.A supporting measure aimed at expanding access to palliative care was adopted with much broader support, passing its first reading in the Senate by a vote of 307 to 17. To date, more than 20% of French departments still lack a palliative care unit, according to figures cited repeatedly by the Bishops’ Conference of France during the debate.The push to legalize assisted dying traces back to September 2022, when the National Consultative Ethics Committee reversed its earlier opposition to assisted dying and endorsed an “ethical” application of the practice. A citizens’ panel Macron had convened spent the following winter weighing the question and backed legalization.The French president unveiled the outline of a bill in March 2024, but the initiative stalled when he dissolved the Assembly in June the same year. Deputy Olivier Falorni, who had filed an earlier and unsuccessful end-of-life bill, revived it in 2025.Critics argue the newly adopted framework is among the most permissive of its kind in the world. Grégor Puppinck, a Catholic lawyer and director general of the European Centre for Law and Justice, has published a point-by-point analysis contending that the entire process rests on the judgment of a single physician, who may meet the patient for the first time on the day of the request and need not be the one already treating them.The two additional professionals that physician must consult are chosen by the same person, are not required to examine the patient in person, and may be consulted by videoconference. Puppinck noted the statute sets no minimum interval between the decision and the act itself beyond a two-day reflection window, relatives have no guaranteed right to be informed beforehand, and they cannot challenge the outcome in court. Doctors who object in conscience must still refer patients to a colleague willing to proceed, and private and religious institutions, including nursing homes, must accommodate mobile euthanasia teams under threat of administrative penalties. Oversight, in Puppinck’s account, comes only after death, based on a report filed by the same clinician who carried it out.The founders of the ethics collective Democracy, Ethics, and Solidarity, Laurent Frémont and Emmanuel Hirsch, wrote in Le Journal du Dimanche that the law’s eligibility criteria — primarily a “serious and incurable condition” causing “unbearable suffering,” are defined vaguely enough that a strict medical interpretation could make more than 1 million people eligible, including patients with chronic illnesses, psychiatric disorders, or advanced age, without requiring a prior written request, a peer review by medical colleagues, or a psychiatric evaluation.A 2025 study by the Fondation pour l’innovation politique estimated the measure could save the state around 1.4 billion euros (.6 billion) a year in health, eldercare, and pension spending, a projection critics have cited as evidence of the pressures vulnerable and elderly patients could face once the law takes effect.The French bishops’ conference called the text a threat to “the most fragile” among French citizens in a statement issued in May 2025 ahead of the Assembly’s first vote on the bill. The archbishop of Paris, Laurent Ulrich, has repeatedly urged lawmakers to reconsider their position, asserting that true solidarity is built through caring for others rather than through death. “More than assistance in dying, our society needs assistance in living,” he has repeatedly stated.In a video appeal to lawmakers released before the vote, Archbishop Vincent Jordy of Tours invoked François Rabelais’ centuries-old warning that “science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul.” What is underway, he said, is “an anthropological shift,” a new way of viewing life and its end that will gradually reshape the country, touching caregivers, families, people with disabilities, and the relationship between generations. He pointed to the Netherlands, where regulators had layered on safeguards for two decades and where health officials confirmed in June that a child under 12 had been euthanized for the first time, under a 2024 expansion of the law to children between the ages of 1 and 12. Making a law, Jordy said, is also opening doors toward things “one had perhaps not imagined” when it was written.
Read More

France legalizes euthanasia after forceful push through Parliament #Catholic The French National Assembly gave final approval on July 15 to a bill legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, making France one of the few European countries to legalize the practice along with Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Spain. The 291-241 vote came three years after President Emmanuel Macron, who had made it one of his key campaign promises, first opened the question to national debate.The vote ended an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate. Members of the National Assembly passed the bill three times over the course of 14 months — most recently on June 30 by a vote of 295 to 232 — and senators rejected it just as many times. On July 7, the Senate passed, by a narrow majority of 169 to 164, with 11 abstentions, a preliminary motion to outright reject the bill rather than debate it, and this motion itself called on the government to end the legislative process. Rather than heeding this call, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu invoked Article 45 of the Constitution, which allows the government to give the National Assembly the final say when repeated readings fail to produce an agreement between the two chambers. He then referred the bill back to the National Assembly for a fourth and final vote instead of a fourth reading in the Senate.The July 15 vote, however, did not close the matter. On July 14, Lecornu announced he would refer part of the text to the Constitutional Council, a step Senate President Gérard Larcher had also urged, citing in particular how the billʼs conscience clause would interact with health and social care facilities built around end-of-life accompaniment that exclude assisted dying. The council must rule within a month, or eight days if the government asks for an expedited review, meaning the law cannot be promulgated until that review is complete even though the Assembly has now adopted it.The end-of-life law covers both euthanasia, administered by a doctor or nurse, and assisted suicide, in which the patient self-administers a lethal substance, under five cumulative conditions: A person must be an adult, a stable resident of France, diagnosed with a serious and incurable condition, in an advanced or terminal phase of that condition, and suffering in a way current treatment cannot relieve, while remaining able to express a free and informed decision. Self-administration is supposed to be the default rule, with the law providing for intervention by a healthcare professional only when the patient is physically unable to act.A supporting measure aimed at expanding access to palliative care was adopted with much broader support, passing its first reading in the Senate by a vote of 307 to 17. To date, more than 20% of French departments still lack a palliative care unit, according to figures cited repeatedly by the Bishops’ Conference of France during the debate.The push to legalize assisted dying traces back to September 2022, when the National Consultative Ethics Committee reversed its earlier opposition to assisted dying and endorsed an “ethical” application of the practice. A citizens’ panel Macron had convened spent the following winter weighing the question and backed legalization.The French president unveiled the outline of a bill in March 2024, but the initiative stalled when he dissolved the Assembly in June the same year. Deputy Olivier Falorni, who had filed an earlier and unsuccessful end-of-life bill, revived it in 2025.Critics argue the newly adopted framework is among the most permissive of its kind in the world. Grégor Puppinck, a Catholic lawyer and director general of the European Centre for Law and Justice, has published a point-by-point analysis contending that the entire process rests on the judgment of a single physician, who may meet the patient for the first time on the day of the request and need not be the one already treating them.The two additional professionals that physician must consult are chosen by the same person, are not required to examine the patient in person, and may be consulted by videoconference. Puppinck noted the statute sets no minimum interval between the decision and the act itself beyond a two-day reflection window, relatives have no guaranteed right to be informed beforehand, and they cannot challenge the outcome in court. Doctors who object in conscience must still refer patients to a colleague willing to proceed, and private and religious institutions, including nursing homes, must accommodate mobile euthanasia teams under threat of administrative penalties. Oversight, in Puppinck’s account, comes only after death, based on a report filed by the same clinician who carried it out.The founders of the ethics collective Democracy, Ethics, and Solidarity, Laurent Frémont and Emmanuel Hirsch, wrote in Le Journal du Dimanche that the law’s eligibility criteria — primarily a “serious and incurable condition” causing “unbearable suffering,” are defined vaguely enough that a strict medical interpretation could make more than 1 million people eligible, including patients with chronic illnesses, psychiatric disorders, or advanced age, without requiring a prior written request, a peer review by medical colleagues, or a psychiatric evaluation.A 2025 study by the Fondation pour l’innovation politique estimated the measure could save the state around 1.4 billion euros ($1.6 billion) a year in health, eldercare, and pension spending, a projection critics have cited as evidence of the pressures vulnerable and elderly patients could face once the law takes effect.The French bishops’ conference called the text a threat to “the most fragile” among French citizens in a statement issued in May 2025 ahead of the Assembly’s first vote on the bill. The archbishop of Paris, Laurent Ulrich, has repeatedly urged lawmakers to reconsider their position, asserting that true solidarity is built through caring for others rather than through death. “More than assistance in dying, our society needs assistance in living,” he has repeatedly stated.In a video appeal to lawmakers released before the vote, Archbishop Vincent Jordy of Tours invoked François Rabelais’ centuries-old warning that “science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul.” What is underway, he said, is “an anthropological shift,” a new way of viewing life and its end that will gradually reshape the country, touching caregivers, families, people with disabilities, and the relationship between generations. He pointed to the Netherlands, where regulators had layered on safeguards for two decades and where health officials confirmed in June that a child under 12 had been euthanized for the first time, under a 2024 expansion of the law to children between the ages of 1 and 12. Making a law, Jordy said, is also opening doors toward things “one had perhaps not imagined” when it was written.

unitedyam

The vote, ending an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate, came three years after President Emmanuel Macron first opened the question to national debate.

Read More