Dollars

Catholics express mixed views on first year of Trump’s second term #Catholic With Speaker of the House Mike Johnson by his side, President Donald Trump speaks to the press following a House Republican meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C. | Credit: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images Jan 20, 2026 / 12:21 pm (CNA). Catholics are offering mixed reactions to the first year of President Donald Trump’s second term, which included domestic policy actions that align with U.S. bishops on gender-related issues, and also tensions over immigration, expansion of the death penalty, and reduced funding for organizations that provide food and basic support to people in need.Trump secured his electoral victory in 2024 with the help of Catholics, who supported him by a double-digit margin, according to exit polls. A Pew Research Center report found that nearly a quarter of Trump’s voters in 2024 were Catholic.Throughout his first year, Trump — who calls himself a nondenominational Christian — has invoked Christianity and created a White House Faith Office. He created a Religious Liberty Commission by executive order in May 2025 and became the first president to issue a proclamation honoring the Catholic feast of the Immaculate Conception in December.Last year, the president also launched the “America Prays” initiative, which encouraged people to dedicate one hour of prayer for the United States and its people in preparation for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 2026.Immigration, poverty, and NGOsJohn White, professor of politics at The Catholic University of America, said the first year of Trump’s second term “challenged Catholics on many levels.”“The brutality of ICE has caused the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to issue an extraordinary statement at the prompting of Pope Leo XIV,” White said, referring to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued a special message in November opposing indiscriminate mass deportations, calling for humane treatment, urging meaningful reform, and affirming the compatibility of national security with human dignity.The Trump administration, with JD Vance, the second Catholic vice president in U.S. history, cut billions of dollars in funding to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), which financially damaged several Catholic nonprofits that had received funding. Trump also signed into law historic cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.“The cuts to NGO funding, SNAP, and Medicaid benefits, alongside the huge increases in health care costs, have hurt the poor and middle class at home and around the world,” he said. “Instead of being the good Samaritan, Trump has challenged our Catholic values and narrowed our vision of who we are and what we believe. JD Vance’s interpretation of ‘Ordo Amoris’ of a hierarchy to those whom we love rather than a universal love is a case in point and has been repudiated by Pope Francis and Pope Leo XIV,” he said.The cuts aligned federal policy with the administration’s agenda, which included strict immigration enforcement, mass deportations of immigrants who are in the country illegally, and less foreign aid support.Catholic Charities USA was previously receiving more than $100 million annually for migrant services, and the Trump administration cut off those funds. In response, the organization scaled back its services.Since Trump took office, the administration said it has deported more than 600,000 people.Karen Sullivan, director of advocacy for the Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC), which provides legal services to migrants, said she is “very concerned about the way that immigration enforcement has been carried out,” adding her organization is “very concerned that human dignity of all persons [needs to] be respected.”Sullivan said the administration is “enabling their officers to use excessive force as they are taking people into custody” and “denying access to oversight at their detention centers.” She also expressed concern about the administration increasing fees for asylum applications and giving agents more leeway to conduct immigration enforcement at sensitive locations, such as churches, schools, and hospitals.She said the large number of deportations and the increase in expedited removals has “been a strain” on organizations that seek to provide legal help to migrants.CLINIC receives inquiries from people who are facing deportation and also those who fear they may be deported. She said: “The worry and the fear among those people [who may face deportation] makes them seek out assistance and advice even more often.”“The pace of the changes that have been happening in the past year have been very difficult to manage,” she said. “We are having to respond very quickly to changes."Executive actions on genderSusan Hanssen, a history professor at the University of Dallas (a Catholic institution), viewed the first year of Trump’s second term in mostly successful terms.“As Catholics we know that the law educates, and during Trump’s first year in office we witnessed an actual shift in public opinion on the LGBT/transgender ideology due to his asserting the scientific and natural common sense that there are only male and female,” Hanssen said.Trump took executive action to prohibit what he called the “chemical and surgical mutilation” of children, such as hormone therapy and surgical transition. He signed a policy restricting participation of transgender athletes in women’s sports. He legally recognized only two genders, determined by biology: male and female.“His strong executive action on this essential point — domestically in making the executive branch remove its trans-affirming language, the executive department of education stop subverting parental rights over their children, and women’s rights in sports, and (importantly) putting an end to USAID’s [U.S. Agency for International Development] pushing this gender agenda on the countries who need our economic assistance,” she said.“This has led to a genuine public shift, with fewer independent corporations choosing to enforce June as LGBT Pride month on their customer base, fewer DEI programs pushing the gender agenda on hiring, and a shift (especially among young men) towards disapproval of gender transitioning children and even towards disapproval of the legalization of so-called same sex ‘marriage,’” she added. “We will need to see how these executive branch victories will affect judicial and legislative action moving forward.”Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk, senior ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Center, had a similar view of some of the social changes.“The current administration has focused significant energy on the important task of ‘putting folks on notice,’ so it’s hard to deny, for example, that the misguided medico-pharmaceutical industry that has profited handsomely from exploiting vulnerable youth and other gender dysphoric individuals can no longer miss the loud indicators that these practices will not be able to continue unabated,” he said.Death penaltyTrump signaled a renewed and more aggressive federal capital-punishment policy in 2025, in opposition to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which teaches that the death penalty is “inadmissible.”Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office directing the Justice Department to actively pursue the federal death penalty for serious crimes. He also directed federal prosecutors to seek death sentences in Washington, D.C., homicide cases. His administration lifted a moratorium on executions, reversing a pause in federal executions and following President Joe Biden’s commutations of federal death sentences.Archbishop Timothy P. Broglio, then-president of the USCCB, in a Jan. 22, 2025, statement called Trump’s support for expanding the federal death penalty “deeply troubling.” Newly elected USCCB president Archbishop Paul Coakley likewise called for the abolition of the death penalty.
Read More

Catholics express mixed views on first year of Trump’s second term #Catholic With Speaker of the House Mike Johnson by his side, President Donald Trump speaks to the press following a House Republican meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C. | Credit: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images Jan 20, 2026 / 12:21 pm (CNA). Catholics are offering mixed reactions to the first year of President Donald Trump’s second term, which included domestic policy actions that align with U.S. bishops on gender-related issues, and also tensions over immigration, expansion of the death penalty, and reduced funding for organizations that provide food and basic support to people in need.Trump secured his electoral victory in 2024 with the help of Catholics, who supported him by a double-digit margin, according to exit polls. A Pew Research Center report found that nearly a quarter of Trump’s voters in 2024 were Catholic.Throughout his first year, Trump — who calls himself a nondenominational Christian — has invoked Christianity and created a White House Faith Office. He created a Religious Liberty Commission by executive order in May 2025 and became the first president to issue a proclamation honoring the Catholic feast of the Immaculate Conception in December.Last year, the president also launched the “America Prays” initiative, which encouraged people to dedicate one hour of prayer for the United States and its people in preparation for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 2026.Immigration, poverty, and NGOsJohn White, professor of politics at The Catholic University of America, said the first year of Trump’s second term “challenged Catholics on many levels.”“The brutality of ICE has caused the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to issue an extraordinary statement at the prompting of Pope Leo XIV,” White said, referring to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued a special message in November opposing indiscriminate mass deportations, calling for humane treatment, urging meaningful reform, and affirming the compatibility of national security with human dignity.The Trump administration, with JD Vance, the second Catholic vice president in U.S. history, cut billions of dollars in funding to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), which financially damaged several Catholic nonprofits that had received funding. Trump also signed into law historic cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.“The cuts to NGO funding, SNAP, and Medicaid benefits, alongside the huge increases in health care costs, have hurt the poor and middle class at home and around the world,” he said. “Instead of being the good Samaritan, Trump has challenged our Catholic values and narrowed our vision of who we are and what we believe. JD Vance’s interpretation of ‘Ordo Amoris’ of a hierarchy to those whom we love rather than a universal love is a case in point and has been repudiated by Pope Francis and Pope Leo XIV,” he said.The cuts aligned federal policy with the administration’s agenda, which included strict immigration enforcement, mass deportations of immigrants who are in the country illegally, and less foreign aid support.Catholic Charities USA was previously receiving more than $100 million annually for migrant services, and the Trump administration cut off those funds. In response, the organization scaled back its services.Since Trump took office, the administration said it has deported more than 600,000 people.Karen Sullivan, director of advocacy for the Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC), which provides legal services to migrants, said she is “very concerned about the way that immigration enforcement has been carried out,” adding her organization is “very concerned that human dignity of all persons [needs to] be respected.”Sullivan said the administration is “enabling their officers to use excessive force as they are taking people into custody” and “denying access to oversight at their detention centers.” She also expressed concern about the administration increasing fees for asylum applications and giving agents more leeway to conduct immigration enforcement at sensitive locations, such as churches, schools, and hospitals.She said the large number of deportations and the increase in expedited removals has “been a strain” on organizations that seek to provide legal help to migrants.CLINIC receives inquiries from people who are facing deportation and also those who fear they may be deported. She said: “The worry and the fear among those people [who may face deportation] makes them seek out assistance and advice even more often.”“The pace of the changes that have been happening in the past year have been very difficult to manage,” she said. “We are having to respond very quickly to changes."Executive actions on genderSusan Hanssen, a history professor at the University of Dallas (a Catholic institution), viewed the first year of Trump’s second term in mostly successful terms.“As Catholics we know that the law educates, and during Trump’s first year in office we witnessed an actual shift in public opinion on the LGBT/transgender ideology due to his asserting the scientific and natural common sense that there are only male and female,” Hanssen said.Trump took executive action to prohibit what he called the “chemical and surgical mutilation” of children, such as hormone therapy and surgical transition. He signed a policy restricting participation of transgender athletes in women’s sports. He legally recognized only two genders, determined by biology: male and female.“His strong executive action on this essential point — domestically in making the executive branch remove its trans-affirming language, the executive department of education stop subverting parental rights over their children, and women’s rights in sports, and (importantly) putting an end to USAID’s [U.S. Agency for International Development] pushing this gender agenda on the countries who need our economic assistance,” she said.“This has led to a genuine public shift, with fewer independent corporations choosing to enforce June as LGBT Pride month on their customer base, fewer DEI programs pushing the gender agenda on hiring, and a shift (especially among young men) towards disapproval of gender transitioning children and even towards disapproval of the legalization of so-called same sex ‘marriage,’” she added. “We will need to see how these executive branch victories will affect judicial and legislative action moving forward.”Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk, senior ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Center, had a similar view of some of the social changes.“The current administration has focused significant energy on the important task of ‘putting folks on notice,’ so it’s hard to deny, for example, that the misguided medico-pharmaceutical industry that has profited handsomely from exploiting vulnerable youth and other gender dysphoric individuals can no longer miss the loud indicators that these practices will not be able to continue unabated,” he said.Death penaltyTrump signaled a renewed and more aggressive federal capital-punishment policy in 2025, in opposition to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which teaches that the death penalty is “inadmissible.”Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office directing the Justice Department to actively pursue the federal death penalty for serious crimes. He also directed federal prosecutors to seek death sentences in Washington, D.C., homicide cases. His administration lifted a moratorium on executions, reversing a pause in federal executions and following President Joe Biden’s commutations of federal death sentences.Archbishop Timothy P. Broglio, then-president of the USCCB, in a Jan. 22, 2025, statement called Trump’s support for expanding the federal death penalty “deeply troubling.” Newly elected USCCB president Archbishop Paul Coakley likewise called for the abolition of the death penalty.

unitedyam

With Speaker of the House Mike Johnson by his side, President Donald Trump speaks to the press following a House Republican meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C. | Credit: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

Jan 20, 2026 / 12:21 pm (CNA).

Catholics are offering mixed reactions to the first year of President Donald Trump’s second term, which included domestic policy actions that align with U.S. bishops on gender-related issues, and also tensions over immigration, expansion of the death penalty, and reduced funding for organizations that provide food and basic support to people in need.

Trump secured his electoral victory in 2024 with the help of Catholics, who supported him by a double-digit margin, according to exit polls. A Pew Research Center report found that nearly a quarter of Trump’s voters in 2024 were Catholic.

Throughout his first year, Trump — who calls himself a nondenominational Christian — has invoked Christianity and created a White House Faith Office. He created a Religious Liberty Commission by executive order in May 2025 and became the first president to issue a proclamation honoring the Catholic feast of the Immaculate Conception in December.

Last year, the president also launched the “America Prays” initiative, which encouraged people to dedicate one hour of prayer for the United States and its people in preparation for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 2026.

Immigration, poverty, and NGOs

John White, professor of politics at The Catholic University of America, said the first year of Trump’s second term “challenged Catholics on many levels.”

“The brutality of ICE has caused the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to issue an extraordinary statement at the prompting of Pope Leo XIV,” White said, referring to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued a special message in November opposing indiscriminate mass deportations, calling for humane treatment, urging meaningful reform, and affirming the compatibility of national security with human dignity.

The Trump administration, with JD Vance, the second Catholic vice president in U.S. history, cut billions of dollars in funding to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), which financially damaged several Catholic nonprofits that had received funding. Trump also signed into law historic cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

“The cuts to NGO funding, SNAP, and Medicaid benefits, alongside the huge increases in health care costs, have hurt the poor and middle class at home and around the world,” he said. “Instead of being the good Samaritan, Trump has challenged our Catholic values and narrowed our vision of who we are and what we believe. JD Vance’s interpretation of ‘Ordo Amoris’ of a hierarchy to those whom we love rather than a universal love is a case in point and has been repudiated by Pope Francis and Pope Leo XIV,” he said.

The cuts aligned federal policy with the administration’s agenda, which included strict immigration enforcement, mass deportations of immigrants who are in the country illegally, and less foreign aid support.

Catholic Charities USA was previously receiving more than $100 million annually for migrant services, and the Trump administration cut off those funds. In response, the organization scaled back its services.

Since Trump took office, the administration said it has deported more than 600,000 people.

Karen Sullivan, director of advocacy for the Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC), which provides legal services to migrants, said she is “very concerned about the way that immigration enforcement has been carried out,” adding her organization is “very concerned that human dignity of all persons [needs to] be respected.”

Sullivan said the administration is “enabling their officers to use excessive force as they are taking people into custody” and “denying access to oversight at their detention centers.” She also expressed concern about the administration increasing fees for asylum applications and giving agents more leeway to conduct immigration enforcement at sensitive locations, such as churches, schools, and hospitals.

She said the large number of deportations and the increase in expedited removals has “been a strain” on organizations that seek to provide legal help to migrants.

CLINIC receives inquiries from people who are facing deportation and also those who fear they may be deported. She said: “The worry and the fear among those people [who may face deportation] makes them seek out assistance and advice even more often.”

“The pace of the changes that have been happening in the past year have been very difficult to manage,” she said. “We are having to respond very quickly to changes."

Executive actions on gender

Susan Hanssen, a history professor at the University of Dallas (a Catholic institution), viewed the first year of Trump’s second term in mostly successful terms.

“As Catholics we know that the law educates, and during Trump’s first year in office we witnessed an actual shift in public opinion on the LGBT/transgender ideology due to his asserting the scientific and natural common sense that there are only male and female,” Hanssen said.

Trump took executive action to prohibit what he called the “chemical and surgical mutilation” of children, such as hormone therapy and surgical transition. He signed a policy restricting participation of transgender athletes in women’s sports. He legally recognized only two genders, determined by biology: male and female.

“His strong executive action on this essential point — domestically in making the executive branch remove its trans-affirming language, the executive department of education stop subverting parental rights over their children, and women’s rights in sports, and (importantly) putting an end to USAID’s [U.S. Agency for International Development] pushing this gender agenda on the countries who need our economic assistance,” she said.

“This has led to a genuine public shift, with fewer independent corporations choosing to enforce June as LGBT Pride month on their customer base, fewer DEI programs pushing the gender agenda on hiring, and a shift (especially among young men) towards disapproval of gender transitioning children and even towards disapproval of the legalization of so-called same sex ‘marriage,’” she added. “We will need to see how these executive branch victories will affect judicial and legislative action moving forward.”

Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk, senior ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Center, had a similar view of some of the social changes.

“The current administration has focused significant energy on the important task of ‘putting folks on notice,’ so it’s hard to deny, for example, that the misguided medico-pharmaceutical industry that has profited handsomely from exploiting vulnerable youth and other gender dysphoric individuals can no longer miss the loud indicators that these practices will not be able to continue unabated,” he said.

Death penalty

Trump signaled a renewed and more aggressive federal capital-punishment policy in 2025, in opposition to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which teaches that the death penalty is “inadmissible.”

Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office directing the Justice Department to actively pursue the federal death penalty for serious crimes. He also directed federal prosecutors to seek death sentences in Washington, D.C., homicide cases. His administration lifted a moratorium on executions, reversing a pause in federal executions and following President Joe Biden’s commutations of federal death sentences.

Archbishop Timothy P. Broglio, then-president of the USCCB, in a Jan. 22, 2025, statement called Trump’s support for expanding the federal death penalty “deeply troubling.” Newly elected USCCB president Archbishop Paul Coakley likewise called for the abolition of the death penalty.

Read More
House Republican budget plan would permanently defund Planned Parenthood #Catholic Republicans say they are crafting a bill to permanently defund Planned Parenthood Jan. 13, 2026. | Credit: usarmyband, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons Jan 14, 2026 / 16:19 pm (CNA). House Republican lawmakers unveiled a framework that outlines their budget priorities for the upcoming fiscal year, which includes permanently defunding large abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood.The Republican Study Committee, which is the largest Republican-aligned caucus in the House, published the framework on Jan. 13. The document is a starting point for crafting the budget but does not include any of the specific language that will ultimately be included in the bill.According to the framework, House Republican leaders intend to “extend and make permanent” the temporary freeze on federal funds for abortion providers, which was included in the tax overhaul that President Donald Trump signed into law last July.That bill included a one-year freeze on Medicaid reimbursements for organizations that provide abortions on a large scale. Although existing law had already blocked direct taxpayer funds for elective abortions, the change in law expanded the ban to include non-abortive services that are offered by organizations that perform abortions on a large scale.If that provision is not extended or made permanent in the next fiscal year, Planned Parenthood would again be eligible for Medicaid reimbursements for its non-abortive services.Many Republicans had initially hoped to implement a more long-term freeze on reimbursements for Planned Parenthood in last year’s bill, but that effort failed. The original House proposal last year planned a 10-year freeze, but it was reduced to only one year following negotiations and compromise.A spokesperson for National Right to Life said the organization is “excited” by the framework, adding that “this proposal would benefit countless American families while also protecting unborn Americans by extending the current defunding of major abortion providers.”“Taxpayer dollars should not be used to subsidize abortion providers, and we are encouraged to see this principle reflected in the reconciliation framework,” the spokesperson said.The ongoing one-year freeze already had a major impact on Planned Parenthood. Nearly 70 Planned Parenthood facilities closed last year, caused in part by the revenue stemming from those provisions in the tax overhaul.Republicans hold a narrow five-seat majority in the House and a six-seat majority in the Senate, which means a small number of Republicans defecting could ultimately sink certain provisions.The framework for the budget proposal also suggests an extension on the long-standing ban on direct federal funding for elective abortions, which has been included in federal budgets since 1976.It also extends a ban on funds for “gender transition/mutilation procedures,” which was included in the tax overhaul.According to the framework, both of these rules would apply to Medicaid reimbursements and tax credits provided through the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. According to the Republican Study Committee, the rules would save taxpayers about .9 billion in federal spending costs.The framework for the budget priorities comes about one week after President Donald Trump asked Republicans to be “flexible” on language related to taxpayer-funded abortion in relation to negotiations surrounding extensions to health care subsidies in the Affordable Care Act.Trump’s comments prompted criticism from some pro-life leaders, including Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.In an Oval Office press conference Jan. 14, Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said they didn’t know anything about HHS funds being released to Planned Parenthood in December.
Read More

House Republican budget plan would permanently defund Planned Parenthood #Catholic Republicans say they are crafting a bill to permanently defund Planned Parenthood Jan. 13, 2026. | Credit: usarmyband, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons Jan 14, 2026 / 16:19 pm (CNA). House Republican lawmakers unveiled a framework that outlines their budget priorities for the upcoming fiscal year, which includes permanently defunding large abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood.The Republican Study Committee, which is the largest Republican-aligned caucus in the House, published the framework on Jan. 13. The document is a starting point for crafting the budget but does not include any of the specific language that will ultimately be included in the bill.According to the framework, House Republican leaders intend to “extend and make permanent” the temporary freeze on federal funds for abortion providers, which was included in the tax overhaul that President Donald Trump signed into law last July.That bill included a one-year freeze on Medicaid reimbursements for organizations that provide abortions on a large scale. Although existing law had already blocked direct taxpayer funds for elective abortions, the change in law expanded the ban to include non-abortive services that are offered by organizations that perform abortions on a large scale.If that provision is not extended or made permanent in the next fiscal year, Planned Parenthood would again be eligible for Medicaid reimbursements for its non-abortive services.Many Republicans had initially hoped to implement a more long-term freeze on reimbursements for Planned Parenthood in last year’s bill, but that effort failed. The original House proposal last year planned a 10-year freeze, but it was reduced to only one year following negotiations and compromise.A spokesperson for National Right to Life said the organization is “excited” by the framework, adding that “this proposal would benefit countless American families while also protecting unborn Americans by extending the current defunding of major abortion providers.”“Taxpayer dollars should not be used to subsidize abortion providers, and we are encouraged to see this principle reflected in the reconciliation framework,” the spokesperson said.The ongoing one-year freeze already had a major impact on Planned Parenthood. Nearly 70 Planned Parenthood facilities closed last year, caused in part by the revenue stemming from those provisions in the tax overhaul.Republicans hold a narrow five-seat majority in the House and a six-seat majority in the Senate, which means a small number of Republicans defecting could ultimately sink certain provisions.The framework for the budget proposal also suggests an extension on the long-standing ban on direct federal funding for elective abortions, which has been included in federal budgets since 1976.It also extends a ban on funds for “gender transition/mutilation procedures,” which was included in the tax overhaul.According to the framework, both of these rules would apply to Medicaid reimbursements and tax credits provided through the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. According to the Republican Study Committee, the rules would save taxpayers about $2.9 billion in federal spending costs.The framework for the budget priorities comes about one week after President Donald Trump asked Republicans to be “flexible” on language related to taxpayer-funded abortion in relation to negotiations surrounding extensions to health care subsidies in the Affordable Care Act.Trump’s comments prompted criticism from some pro-life leaders, including Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.In an Oval Office press conference Jan. 14, Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said they didn’t know anything about HHS funds being released to Planned Parenthood in December.

unitedyam

Republicans say they are crafting a bill to permanently defund Planned Parenthood Jan. 13, 2026. | Credit: usarmyband, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Jan 14, 2026 / 16:19 pm (CNA).

House Republican lawmakers unveiled a framework that outlines their budget priorities for the upcoming fiscal year, which includes permanently defunding large abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood.

The Republican Study Committee, which is the largest Republican-aligned caucus in the House, published the framework on Jan. 13. The document is a starting point for crafting the budget but does not include any of the specific language that will ultimately be included in the bill.

According to the framework, House Republican leaders intend to “extend and make permanent” the temporary freeze on federal funds for abortion providers, which was included in the tax overhaul that President Donald Trump signed into law last July.

That bill included a one-year freeze on Medicaid reimbursements for organizations that provide abortions on a large scale. Although existing law had already blocked direct taxpayer funds for elective abortions, the change in law expanded the ban to include non-abortive services that are offered by organizations that perform abortions on a large scale.

If that provision is not extended or made permanent in the next fiscal year, Planned Parenthood would again be eligible for Medicaid reimbursements for its non-abortive services.

Many Republicans had initially hoped to implement a more long-term freeze on reimbursements for Planned Parenthood in last year’s bill, but that effort failed. The original House proposal last year planned a 10-year freeze, but it was reduced to only one year following negotiations and compromise.

A spokesperson for National Right to Life said the organization is “excited” by the framework, adding that “this proposal would benefit countless American families while also protecting unborn Americans by extending the current defunding of major abortion providers.”

“Taxpayer dollars should not be used to subsidize abortion providers, and we are encouraged to see this principle reflected in the reconciliation framework,” the spokesperson said.

The ongoing one-year freeze already had a major impact on Planned Parenthood. Nearly 70 Planned Parenthood facilities closed last year, caused in part by the revenue stemming from those provisions in the tax overhaul.

Republicans hold a narrow five-seat majority in the House and a six-seat majority in the Senate, which means a small number of Republicans defecting could ultimately sink certain provisions.

The framework for the budget proposal also suggests an extension on the long-standing ban on direct federal funding for elective abortions, which has been included in federal budgets since 1976.

It also extends a ban on funds for “gender transition/mutilation procedures,” which was included in the tax overhaul.

According to the framework, both of these rules would apply to Medicaid reimbursements and tax credits provided through the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. According to the Republican Study Committee, the rules would save taxpayers about $2.9 billion in federal spending costs.

The framework for the budget priorities comes about one week after President Donald Trump asked Republicans to be “flexible” on language related to taxpayer-funded abortion in relation to negotiations surrounding extensions to health care subsidies in the Affordable Care Act.

Trump’s comments prompted criticism from some pro-life leaders, including Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.

In an Oval Office press conference Jan. 14, Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said they didn’t know anything about HHS funds being released to Planned Parenthood in December.

Read More
Trump urges Republican ‘flexibility’ on taxpayer-funded abortions #Catholic President Donald Trump talks to Republicans about their stance on the Hyde Amendment on Jan. 6, 2026. | Credit: Mandel NGAN/AFP via Getty Images Jan 6, 2026 / 18:10 pm (CNA). President Donald Trump is asking congressional Republicans to be more flexible on taxpayer funding for abortions as lawmakers continue to negotiate an extension to health care subsidies related to the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.Some federal subsidies that lowered premiums for those enrolled in the Affordable Care Act expired in December. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that the average increase to premiums for people who lost the subsidies will be about 114%, from $888 in 2025 to $1,904 in 2026. The exact costs will be different, depending on specific plans.Trump has encouraged his party to work on extending those subsidies and is asking them to be “flexible” on a provision that could affect tax-funded abortion. Democrats have proposed ending the restrictions of the Hyde Amendment, which bans direct federal funding for abortions in most cases.“Let the money go directly to the people,” Trump said at the House Republican Conference retreat at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts on Jan. 6.“Now you have to be a little flexible on Hyde,” the president said. “You know that you got to be a little flexible. You got to work something [out]. You got to use ingenuity. You got to work. We’re all big fans of everything, but you got to be flexible. You have to have flexibility.”The Hyde Amendment began as a bipartisan provision in funding bills that prohibited the use of federal funds for more than 45 years. Lawmakers have reauthorized the prohibition every year since it was first introduced in 1976.A study from the Charlotte Lozier Institute estimates that the Hyde Amendment has saved more than 2.6 million lives. According to a poll conducted by the Marist Institute for Public Opinion, which was commissioned by the Knights of Columbus, nearly 6 in 10 Americans oppose tax funding for abortions.However, in recent years, many Democratic politicians have tried to keep the rule out of spending bills. Former President Joe Biden abandoned the Hyde Amendment in budget proposals, but it was ultimately included in the final compromise versions that became law.Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, criticized Trump for urging flexibility on the provision, calling its support “an unshakeable bedrock principle and a minimum standard in the Republican Party.”Dannenfelser said Republicans “are sure to lose this November” if they abandon Hyde: “The voters sent a [Republican] trifecta to Washington and they expect it to govern like one.”“Giving in to Democrat demands that our tax dollars are used to fund plans that cover abortion on demand until birth would be a massive betrayal,” she said.Dannenfelser also noted that, before these comments, Trump has consistently supported the Hyde Amendment. The president issued an executive order in January on enforcing the Hyde Amendment that accused Biden’s administration of disregarding this “commonsense policy.”“For nearly five decades, the Congress has annually enacted the Hyde Amendment and similar laws that prevent federal funding of elective abortion, reflecting a long-standing consensus that American taxpayers should not be forced to pay for that practice,” the executive order reads.“It is the policy of the United States, consistent with the Hyde Amendment, to end the forced use of federal taxpayer dollars to fund or promote elective abortion,” it adds.
Read More

Trump urges Republican ‘flexibility’ on taxpayer-funded abortions #Catholic President Donald Trump talks to Republicans about their stance on the Hyde Amendment on Jan. 6, 2026. | Credit: Mandel NGAN/AFP via Getty Images Jan 6, 2026 / 18:10 pm (CNA). President Donald Trump is asking congressional Republicans to be more flexible on taxpayer funding for abortions as lawmakers continue to negotiate an extension to health care subsidies related to the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.Some federal subsidies that lowered premiums for those enrolled in the Affordable Care Act expired in December. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that the average increase to premiums for people who lost the subsidies will be about 114%, from $888 in 2025 to $1,904 in 2026. The exact costs will be different, depending on specific plans.Trump has encouraged his party to work on extending those subsidies and is asking them to be “flexible” on a provision that could affect tax-funded abortion. Democrats have proposed ending the restrictions of the Hyde Amendment, which bans direct federal funding for abortions in most cases.“Let the money go directly to the people,” Trump said at the House Republican Conference retreat at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts on Jan. 6.“Now you have to be a little flexible on Hyde,” the president said. “You know that you got to be a little flexible. You got to work something [out]. You got to use ingenuity. You got to work. We’re all big fans of everything, but you got to be flexible. You have to have flexibility.”The Hyde Amendment began as a bipartisan provision in funding bills that prohibited the use of federal funds for more than 45 years. Lawmakers have reauthorized the prohibition every year since it was first introduced in 1976.A study from the Charlotte Lozier Institute estimates that the Hyde Amendment has saved more than 2.6 million lives. According to a poll conducted by the Marist Institute for Public Opinion, which was commissioned by the Knights of Columbus, nearly 6 in 10 Americans oppose tax funding for abortions.However, in recent years, many Democratic politicians have tried to keep the rule out of spending bills. Former President Joe Biden abandoned the Hyde Amendment in budget proposals, but it was ultimately included in the final compromise versions that became law.Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, criticized Trump for urging flexibility on the provision, calling its support “an unshakeable bedrock principle and a minimum standard in the Republican Party.”Dannenfelser said Republicans “are sure to lose this November” if they abandon Hyde: “The voters sent a [Republican] trifecta to Washington and they expect it to govern like one.”“Giving in to Democrat demands that our tax dollars are used to fund plans that cover abortion on demand until birth would be a massive betrayal,” she said.Dannenfelser also noted that, before these comments, Trump has consistently supported the Hyde Amendment. The president issued an executive order in January on enforcing the Hyde Amendment that accused Biden’s administration of disregarding this “commonsense policy.”“For nearly five decades, the Congress has annually enacted the Hyde Amendment and similar laws that prevent federal funding of elective abortion, reflecting a long-standing consensus that American taxpayers should not be forced to pay for that practice,” the executive order reads.“It is the policy of the United States, consistent with the Hyde Amendment, to end the forced use of federal taxpayer dollars to fund or promote elective abortion,” it adds.

unitedyam

President Donald Trump talks to Republicans about their stance on the Hyde Amendment on Jan. 6, 2026. | Credit: Mandel NGAN/AFP via Getty Images

Jan 6, 2026 / 18:10 pm (CNA).

President Donald Trump is asking congressional Republicans to be more flexible on taxpayer funding for abortions as lawmakers continue to negotiate an extension to health care subsidies related to the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

Some federal subsidies that lowered premiums for those enrolled in the Affordable Care Act expired in December.

The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that the average increase to premiums for people who lost the subsidies will be about 114%, from $888 in 2025 to $1,904 in 2026. The exact costs will be different, depending on specific plans.

Trump has encouraged his party to work on extending those subsidies and is asking them to be “flexible” on a provision that could affect tax-funded abortion. Democrats have proposed ending the restrictions of the Hyde Amendment, which bans direct federal funding for abortions in most cases.

“Let the money go directly to the people,” Trump said at the House Republican Conference retreat at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts on Jan. 6.

“Now you have to be a little flexible on Hyde,” the president said. “You know that you got to be a little flexible. You got to work something [out]. You got to use ingenuity. You got to work. We’re all big fans of everything, but you got to be flexible. You have to have flexibility.”

The Hyde Amendment began as a bipartisan provision in funding bills that prohibited the use of federal funds for more than 45 years. Lawmakers have reauthorized the prohibition every year since it was first introduced in 1976.

A study from the Charlotte Lozier Institute estimates that the Hyde Amendment has saved more than 2.6 million lives. According to a poll conducted by the Marist Institute for Public Opinion, which was commissioned by the Knights of Columbus, nearly 6 in 10 Americans oppose tax funding for abortions.

However, in recent years, many Democratic politicians have tried to keep the rule out of spending bills. Former President Joe Biden abandoned the Hyde Amendment in budget proposals, but it was ultimately included in the final compromise versions that became law.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, criticized Trump for urging flexibility on the provision, calling its support “an unshakeable bedrock principle and a minimum standard in the Republican Party.”

Dannenfelser said Republicans “are sure to lose this November” if they abandon Hyde: “The voters sent a [Republican] trifecta to Washington and they expect it to govern like one.”

“Giving in to Democrat demands that our tax dollars are used to fund plans that cover abortion on demand until birth would be a massive betrayal,” she said.

Dannenfelser also noted that, before these comments, Trump has consistently supported the Hyde Amendment. The president issued an executive order in January on enforcing the Hyde Amendment that accused Biden’s administration of disregarding this “commonsense policy.”

“For nearly five decades, the Congress has annually enacted the Hyde Amendment and similar laws that prevent federal funding of elective abortion, reflecting a long-standing consensus that American taxpayers should not be forced to pay for that practice,” the executive order reads.

“It is the policy of the United States, consistent with the Hyde Amendment, to end the forced use of federal taxpayer dollars to fund or promote elective abortion,” it adds.

Read More
Albany’s retired bishop files for personal bankruptcy #Catholic Bishop Edward Scarfenberger. / Credit: Photo courtesy of the Diocese of Albany National Catholic Register, Dec 19, 2025 / 12:24 pm (CNA). A retired New York bishop has filed for personal bankruptcy protection in federal court after a state jury verdict found him, along with other officials, personally liable for the collapse of a Catholic hospital pension fund that left about 1,100 retirees without the lifetime monthly payments they were expecting.It’s not clear whether a Catholic bishop in the United States has ever previously filed for personal bankruptcy protection.Bishop Edward Scharfenberger, 77, who served as bishop of Albany from April 2014 until his retirement in October, is seeking protection from creditors for his assets valued at between $100,001 and $500,000, according to a filing Tuesday in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York.The seven-page filing does not list the bishop’s assets but states that he has between 100 and 199 creditors and debts totaling between $1,000,001 and $10 million.Last week, a jury found Scharfenberger 10% liable in a $54.2 million judgment in a civil lawsuit over the failed pension plan once provided by St. Clare’s Hospital in Schenectady, a Catholic hospital that operated from 1949 until 2008, according to The Evangelist, the diocese’s newspaper.The verdict and judgment, issued Dec. 12, cover compensatory damages — the amount a court finds is owed to plaintiffs for harm they have suffered — but not punitive damages, which may be added in cases of recklessness, malice, or fraud. The bankruptcy filings by the bishop and another defendant in the state lawsuit over the pension plan failure forced a pause in a punitive damages hearing earlier this week, according to WNYT Channel 13 in Albany.The National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, was unable to reach Scharfenberger before the publication of this story. A lawyer representing the bishop acknowledged a request for comment Dec. 17 but did not immediately provide one.A rare personal bankruptcyIn recent decades, bankruptcies have occurred regularly in the Catholic Church in the United States. Between 2004 and November 2025, 39 of the country’s dioceses have filed for bankruptcy, almost all to protect assets from clergy sex-abuse lawsuits, as the Register reported last month. One of those is the Diocese of Albany, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2023. But those diocesan cases were filed under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, which allows a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship to reorganize and continue operating while developing a court-approved plan to repay creditors.Scharfenberger filed under Chapter 13, which allows an individual with regular income who cannot pay debts to keep certain assets while working out a repayment plan. “The rules in Chapter 13 permit a debtor to keep property and confirm a plan with payments to creditors based on the debtor’s ‘disposable income,’” said Marie Reilly, a bankruptcy expert and law professor at Penn State Dickinson Law, in an email. “If the debtor commits his disposable income to paying creditors for the term of a three- to five-year plan, he gets a discharge (forgiveness) of the unpaid balance.”Reilly, who has researched several dozen diocesan bankruptcies for The Catholic Project, a lay initiative of The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., told the Register that the bankruptcy filing does not necessarily solve all of the bishop’s money problems.“There are exceptions — some debts don’t get discharged. Creditors can object to the plan if it does not meet the statutory requirements,” Reilly said. “And, it is possible that the pension fund creditor may move to dismiss the bishop’s Chapter 13 case as having been filed ‘in bad faith.’”$50 million shortfall St. Clare’s Hospital was originally run by the Franciscan Sisters of the Poor. The Diocese of Albany maintains that it never owned the hospital and that the bishop of Albany merely provided “canonical oversight” to make sure the hospital met “its mission to serve all in accord with Catholic moral standards,” according to an August 2025 statement from the diocese.Last week, the jury found that the Diocese of Albany has no liability for the pension failure, instead holding the hospital corporation and certain officers and board members accountable. In addition to Scharfenberger, the jury found two deceased employees of the diocese liable, according to The Evangelist: Former Albany Bishop Howard Hubbard (1938–2023), who led the diocese from 1977 to 2014, was found 20% liable; and Father David LeFort, a former vicar general of the diocese who died in August 2023, was found 5% liable. Also found liable were St. Clare’s Corporation (20%), St. Clare’s president Joseph Pofit (25%), and former St. Clare’s president Robert Perry (20%), according to The Evangelist.The judgments stem from a pension plan that operated for about 60 years. In 1959, the hospital began offering employees a defined-benefit plan that provided a lifetime monthly pension after retirement.Church plan exempt from ERISALike most plans operated by Catholic institutions, the pension plan had a religious exemption from the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (known as ERISA), which sets minimum funding requirements for most nonreligious pension plans and also enables the federal government to step in and make payments to retirees of failed plans, using a fund financed by covered pension plans.When the hospital closed in 2008, the officers of St. Clare’s “determined that the corporation would continue to exist for purposes of administering the pension plan,” according to a complaint filed in state court in Schenectady County by the New York attorney general’s office in May 2022. “They also chose to continue treating the pension plan as a ‘Church plan’ — which it could do only if the corporation’s former employees and pensioners were designated as employees of the Church. This was all in order to avoid the contribution and insurance requirements of ERISA, and the duties imposed by ERISA upon corporation directors and trustees as fiduciaries,” the complaint states.The bishop of Albany was automatically a member of the hospital’s board and served as its honorary chairman, and had authority to appoint most of the directors on the board, according to the state attorney general’s complaint.The attorney general’s office alleged that St. Clare’s Corporation failed to make contributions to the pension fund “for all but three years from 2001 to 2019” and concealed from retirees “the insolvency of the pension plan.”In 2018, the St. Clare’s board terminated the pension plan effective Feb. 1, 2019, because of an approximately $50 million shortfall. More than 1,100 employees lost retirement benefits, including about 650 who lost all pension payments and about 450 who received a lump-sum payment “equal to 70% of the value of their vested pension,” the complaint states. The retired employees include “nurses, lab technicians, social workers, EMTs, orderlies, housekeepers, and other essential workers” who worked at the hospital “between 10 and 50 years,” the complaint states.Testimony and reactionOn Dec. 9 during the civil trial, Scharfenberger testified that during his tenure no boards he sat on ever discussed the hospital’s pension plan, according to The Times-Union of Albany. In a written statement issued in August, when Scharfenberger still led the Diocese of Albany, the diocese said the bishop “has actively sought ways to help the pensioners” while denying that the diocese ever “exercised any control over St. Clare’s Hospital operations or its pension.” “He hosted a listening session with pensioners at Siena College to identify issues and consider ways to help those in need. He also reached out to the Mother Cabrini Foundation to try to secure funding for the pensioners, but that effort was unable to move forward once the pensioners filed the lawsuit,” the statement said. “The diocese is eager to see the case move forward and promptly resolved,” the August statement continued. “Our prayers continue for all who are struggling in any way, and as we stated previously, our offer to connect those in need with services that can help, stands. No one should walk alone.”His successor, Bishop Mark O’Connell, who was installed as bishop of Albany on Dec. 5, told reporters shortly before the verdict was announced last week: “I care deeply about their hurt [and] not having their pensions,” according to The Evangelist.During the Dec. 12 press conference, when a reporter asked O’Connell what the diocese would do if the jury found the diocese liable for the pension fund collapse, the bishop noted that the diocese is already in the midst of a bankruptcy process.“If we are liable, then we’ll do what we can to make amends, given that they are one creditor as a group among many people accusing the Diocese of Albany,” O’Connell said, according to WAMC Northeast Public Radio. “And that’s what bankruptcy process is. We obviously cannot pay a billion dollars. Right? So that’s what Chapter 11 is all about, to figure out what’s fair. And since you have a bankruptcy judge and mediators, it’s not up to us.”Later that day, the jury found the diocese not liable in the pension fund collapse lawsuit. The diocese issued a written statement, according to The Evangelist, that said: “As grateful as we are for the jury’s informed decision, we are still very much aware of the hurt felt by the St. Clare’s pensioners who cared for the sick and the poor throughout the long history of St. Clare’s Hospital. This does not mean that we will turn our backs to the pensioners, for as Bishop O’Connell has noted, they are a part of our flock; they are still in need of healing.”That same day, lead plaintiff Mary Hartshorne, who worked in the hospital’s radiology department for about 28 years, told WNYT Channel 13 in Albany that she and other hospital retirees were pleased with the jury’s verdict but did not feel they would be made whole.“We’ve been playing this game for seven and a half years, and I think my question I ask everybody is: How do you get that back? You don’t,” she said.This story was first published by the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, and has been adapted by CNA.
Read More

Albany’s retired bishop files for personal bankruptcy #Catholic Bishop Edward Scarfenberger. / Credit: Photo courtesy of the Diocese of Albany National Catholic Register, Dec 19, 2025 / 12:24 pm (CNA). A retired New York bishop has filed for personal bankruptcy protection in federal court after a state jury verdict found him, along with other officials, personally liable for the collapse of a Catholic hospital pension fund that left about 1,100 retirees without the lifetime monthly payments they were expecting.It’s not clear whether a Catholic bishop in the United States has ever previously filed for personal bankruptcy protection.Bishop Edward Scharfenberger, 77, who served as bishop of Albany from April 2014 until his retirement in October, is seeking protection from creditors for his assets valued at between $100,001 and $500,000, according to a filing Tuesday in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York.The seven-page filing does not list the bishop’s assets but states that he has between 100 and 199 creditors and debts totaling between $1,000,001 and $10 million.Last week, a jury found Scharfenberger 10% liable in a $54.2 million judgment in a civil lawsuit over the failed pension plan once provided by St. Clare’s Hospital in Schenectady, a Catholic hospital that operated from 1949 until 2008, according to The Evangelist, the diocese’s newspaper.The verdict and judgment, issued Dec. 12, cover compensatory damages — the amount a court finds is owed to plaintiffs for harm they have suffered — but not punitive damages, which may be added in cases of recklessness, malice, or fraud. The bankruptcy filings by the bishop and another defendant in the state lawsuit over the pension plan failure forced a pause in a punitive damages hearing earlier this week, according to WNYT Channel 13 in Albany.The National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, was unable to reach Scharfenberger before the publication of this story. A lawyer representing the bishop acknowledged a request for comment Dec. 17 but did not immediately provide one.A rare personal bankruptcyIn recent decades, bankruptcies have occurred regularly in the Catholic Church in the United States. Between 2004 and November 2025, 39 of the country’s dioceses have filed for bankruptcy, almost all to protect assets from clergy sex-abuse lawsuits, as the Register reported last month. One of those is the Diocese of Albany, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2023. But those diocesan cases were filed under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, which allows a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship to reorganize and continue operating while developing a court-approved plan to repay creditors.Scharfenberger filed under Chapter 13, which allows an individual with regular income who cannot pay debts to keep certain assets while working out a repayment plan. “The rules in Chapter 13 permit a debtor to keep property and confirm a plan with payments to creditors based on the debtor’s ‘disposable income,’” said Marie Reilly, a bankruptcy expert and law professor at Penn State Dickinson Law, in an email. “If the debtor commits his disposable income to paying creditors for the term of a three- to five-year plan, he gets a discharge (forgiveness) of the unpaid balance.”Reilly, who has researched several dozen diocesan bankruptcies for The Catholic Project, a lay initiative of The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., told the Register that the bankruptcy filing does not necessarily solve all of the bishop’s money problems.“There are exceptions — some debts don’t get discharged. Creditors can object to the plan if it does not meet the statutory requirements,” Reilly said. “And, it is possible that the pension fund creditor may move to dismiss the bishop’s Chapter 13 case as having been filed ‘in bad faith.’”$50 million shortfall St. Clare’s Hospital was originally run by the Franciscan Sisters of the Poor. The Diocese of Albany maintains that it never owned the hospital and that the bishop of Albany merely provided “canonical oversight” to make sure the hospital met “its mission to serve all in accord with Catholic moral standards,” according to an August 2025 statement from the diocese.Last week, the jury found that the Diocese of Albany has no liability for the pension failure, instead holding the hospital corporation and certain officers and board members accountable. In addition to Scharfenberger, the jury found two deceased employees of the diocese liable, according to The Evangelist: Former Albany Bishop Howard Hubbard (1938–2023), who led the diocese from 1977 to 2014, was found 20% liable; and Father David LeFort, a former vicar general of the diocese who died in August 2023, was found 5% liable. Also found liable were St. Clare’s Corporation (20%), St. Clare’s president Joseph Pofit (25%), and former St. Clare’s president Robert Perry (20%), according to The Evangelist.The judgments stem from a pension plan that operated for about 60 years. In 1959, the hospital began offering employees a defined-benefit plan that provided a lifetime monthly pension after retirement.Church plan exempt from ERISALike most plans operated by Catholic institutions, the pension plan had a religious exemption from the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (known as ERISA), which sets minimum funding requirements for most nonreligious pension plans and also enables the federal government to step in and make payments to retirees of failed plans, using a fund financed by covered pension plans.When the hospital closed in 2008, the officers of St. Clare’s “determined that the corporation would continue to exist for purposes of administering the pension plan,” according to a complaint filed in state court in Schenectady County by the New York attorney general’s office in May 2022. “They also chose to continue treating the pension plan as a ‘Church plan’ — which it could do only if the corporation’s former employees and pensioners were designated as employees of the Church. This was all in order to avoid the contribution and insurance requirements of ERISA, and the duties imposed by ERISA upon corporation directors and trustees as fiduciaries,” the complaint states.The bishop of Albany was automatically a member of the hospital’s board and served as its honorary chairman, and had authority to appoint most of the directors on the board, according to the state attorney general’s complaint.The attorney general’s office alleged that St. Clare’s Corporation failed to make contributions to the pension fund “for all but three years from 2001 to 2019” and concealed from retirees “the insolvency of the pension plan.”In 2018, the St. Clare’s board terminated the pension plan effective Feb. 1, 2019, because of an approximately $50 million shortfall. More than 1,100 employees lost retirement benefits, including about 650 who lost all pension payments and about 450 who received a lump-sum payment “equal to 70% of the value of their vested pension,” the complaint states. The retired employees include “nurses, lab technicians, social workers, EMTs, orderlies, housekeepers, and other essential workers” who worked at the hospital “between 10 and 50 years,” the complaint states.Testimony and reactionOn Dec. 9 during the civil trial, Scharfenberger testified that during his tenure no boards he sat on ever discussed the hospital’s pension plan, according to The Times-Union of Albany. In a written statement issued in August, when Scharfenberger still led the Diocese of Albany, the diocese said the bishop “has actively sought ways to help the pensioners” while denying that the diocese ever “exercised any control over St. Clare’s Hospital operations or its pension.” “He hosted a listening session with pensioners at Siena College to identify issues and consider ways to help those in need. He also reached out to the Mother Cabrini Foundation to try to secure funding for the pensioners, but that effort was unable to move forward once the pensioners filed the lawsuit,” the statement said. “The diocese is eager to see the case move forward and promptly resolved,” the August statement continued. “Our prayers continue for all who are struggling in any way, and as we stated previously, our offer to connect those in need with services that can help, stands. No one should walk alone.”His successor, Bishop Mark O’Connell, who was installed as bishop of Albany on Dec. 5, told reporters shortly before the verdict was announced last week: “I care deeply about their hurt [and] not having their pensions,” according to The Evangelist.During the Dec. 12 press conference, when a reporter asked O’Connell what the diocese would do if the jury found the diocese liable for the pension fund collapse, the bishop noted that the diocese is already in the midst of a bankruptcy process.“If we are liable, then we’ll do what we can to make amends, given that they are one creditor as a group among many people accusing the Diocese of Albany,” O’Connell said, according to WAMC Northeast Public Radio. “And that’s what bankruptcy process is. We obviously cannot pay a billion dollars. Right? So that’s what Chapter 11 is all about, to figure out what’s fair. And since you have a bankruptcy judge and mediators, it’s not up to us.”Later that day, the jury found the diocese not liable in the pension fund collapse lawsuit. The diocese issued a written statement, according to The Evangelist, that said: “As grateful as we are for the jury’s informed decision, we are still very much aware of the hurt felt by the St. Clare’s pensioners who cared for the sick and the poor throughout the long history of St. Clare’s Hospital. This does not mean that we will turn our backs to the pensioners, for as Bishop O’Connell has noted, they are a part of our flock; they are still in need of healing.”That same day, lead plaintiff Mary Hartshorne, who worked in the hospital’s radiology department for about 28 years, told WNYT Channel 13 in Albany that she and other hospital retirees were pleased with the jury’s verdict but did not feel they would be made whole.“We’ve been playing this game for seven and a half years, and I think my question I ask everybody is: How do you get that back? You don’t,” she said.This story was first published by the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, and has been adapted by CNA.

unitedyam

Bishop Edward Scarfenberger. / Credit: Photo courtesy of the Diocese of Albany

National Catholic Register, Dec 19, 2025 / 12:24 pm (CNA).

A retired New York bishop has filed for personal bankruptcy protection in federal court after a state jury verdict found him, along with other officials, personally liable for the collapse of a Catholic hospital pension fund that left about 1,100 retirees without the lifetime monthly payments they were expecting.

It’s not clear whether a Catholic bishop in the United States has ever previously filed for personal bankruptcy protection.

Bishop Edward Scharfenberger, 77, who served as bishop of Albany from April 2014 until his retirement in October, is seeking protection from creditors for his assets valued at between $100,001 and $500,000, according to a filing Tuesday in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York.

The seven-page filing does not list the bishop’s assets but states that he has between 100 and 199 creditors and debts totaling between $1,000,001 and $10 million.

Last week, a jury found Scharfenberger 10% liable in a $54.2 million judgment in a civil lawsuit over the failed pension plan once provided by St. Clare’s Hospital in Schenectady, a Catholic hospital that operated from 1949 until 2008, according to The Evangelist, the diocese’s newspaper.

The verdict and judgment, issued Dec. 12, cover compensatory damages — the amount a court finds is owed to plaintiffs for harm they have suffered — but not punitive damages, which may be added in cases of recklessness, malice, or fraud. The bankruptcy filings by the bishop and another defendant in the state lawsuit over the pension plan failure forced a pause in a punitive damages hearing earlier this week, according to WNYT Channel 13 in Albany.

The National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, was unable to reach Scharfenberger before the publication of this story. A lawyer representing the bishop acknowledged a request for comment Dec. 17 but did not immediately provide one.

A rare personal bankruptcy

In recent decades, bankruptcies have occurred regularly in the Catholic Church in the United States. Between 2004 and November 2025, 39 of the country’s dioceses have filed for bankruptcy, almost all to protect assets from clergy sex-abuse lawsuits, as the Register reported last month. One of those is the Diocese of Albany, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2023. 

But those diocesan cases were filed under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, which allows a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship to reorganize and continue operating while developing a court-approved plan to repay creditors.

Scharfenberger filed under Chapter 13, which allows an individual with regular income who cannot pay debts to keep certain assets while working out a repayment plan. 

“The rules in Chapter 13 permit a debtor to keep property and confirm a plan with payments to creditors based on the debtor’s ‘disposable income,’” said Marie Reilly, a bankruptcy expert and law professor at Penn State Dickinson Law, in an email. “If the debtor commits his disposable income to paying creditors for the term of a three- to five-year plan, he gets a discharge (forgiveness) of the unpaid balance.”

Reilly, who has researched several dozen diocesan bankruptcies for The Catholic Project, a lay initiative of The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., told the Register that the bankruptcy filing does not necessarily solve all of the bishop’s money problems.

“There are exceptions — some debts don’t get discharged. Creditors can object to the plan if it does not meet the statutory requirements,” Reilly said. “And, it is possible that the pension fund creditor may move to dismiss the bishop’s Chapter 13 case as having been filed ‘in bad faith.’”

$50 million shortfall 

St. Clare’s Hospital was originally run by the Franciscan Sisters of the Poor. The Diocese of Albany maintains that it never owned the hospital and that the bishop of Albany merely provided “canonical oversight” to make sure the hospital met “its mission to serve all in accord with Catholic moral standards,” according to an August 2025 statement from the diocese.

Last week, the jury found that the Diocese of Albany has no liability for the pension failure, instead holding the hospital corporation and certain officers and board members accountable. 

In addition to Scharfenberger, the jury found two deceased employees of the diocese liable, according to The Evangelist: Former Albany Bishop Howard Hubbard (1938–2023), who led the diocese from 1977 to 2014, was found 20% liable; and Father David LeFort, a former vicar general of the diocese who died in August 2023, was found 5% liable. 

Also found liable were St. Clare’s Corporation (20%), St. Clare’s president Joseph Pofit (25%), and former St. Clare’s president Robert Perry (20%), according to The Evangelist.

The judgments stem from a pension plan that operated for about 60 years. 

In 1959, the hospital began offering employees a defined-benefit plan that provided a lifetime monthly pension after retirement.

Church plan exempt from ERISA

Like most plans operated by Catholic institutions, the pension plan had a religious exemption from the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (known as ERISA), which sets minimum funding requirements for most nonreligious pension plans and also enables the federal government to step in and make payments to retirees of failed plans, using a fund financed by covered pension plans.

When the hospital closed in 2008, the officers of St. Clare’s “determined that the corporation would continue to exist for purposes of administering the pension plan,” according to a complaint filed in state court in Schenectady County by the New York attorney general’s office in May 2022. 

“They also chose to continue treating the pension plan as a ‘Church plan’ — which it could do only if the corporation’s former employees and pensioners were designated as employees of the Church. This was all in order to avoid the contribution and insurance requirements of ERISA, and the duties imposed by ERISA upon corporation directors and trustees as fiduciaries,” the complaint states.

The bishop of Albany was automatically a member of the hospital’s board and served as its honorary chairman, and had authority to appoint most of the directors on the board, according to the state attorney general’s complaint.

The attorney general’s office alleged that St. Clare’s Corporation failed to make contributions to the pension fund “for all but three years from 2001 to 2019” and concealed from retirees “the insolvency of the pension plan.”

In 2018, the St. Clare’s board terminated the pension plan effective Feb. 1, 2019, because of an approximately $50 million shortfall. More than 1,100 employees lost retirement benefits, including about 650 who lost all pension payments and about 450 who received a lump-sum payment “equal to 70% of the value of their vested pension,” the complaint states. The retired employees include “nurses, lab technicians, social workers, EMTs, orderlies, housekeepers, and other essential workers” who worked at the hospital “between 10 and 50 years,” the complaint states.

Testimony and reaction

On Dec. 9 during the civil trial, Scharfenberger testified that during his tenure no boards he sat on ever discussed the hospital’s pension plan, according to The Times-Union of Albany. 

In a written statement issued in August, when Scharfenberger still led the Diocese of Albany, the diocese said the bishop “has actively sought ways to help the pensioners” while denying that the diocese ever “exercised any control over St. Clare’s Hospital operations or its pension.” 

“He hosted a listening session with pensioners at Siena College to identify issues and consider ways to help those in need. He also reached out to the Mother Cabrini Foundation to try to secure funding for the pensioners, but that effort was unable to move forward once the pensioners filed the lawsuit,” the statement said. 

“The diocese is eager to see the case move forward and promptly resolved,” the August statement continued. “Our prayers continue for all who are struggling in any way, and as we stated previously, our offer to connect those in need with services that can help, stands. No one should walk alone.”

His successor, Bishop Mark O’Connell, who was installed as bishop of Albany on Dec. 5, told reporters shortly before the verdict was announced last week: “I care deeply about their hurt [and] not having their pensions,” according to The Evangelist.

During the Dec. 12 press conference, when a reporter asked O’Connell what the diocese would do if the jury found the diocese liable for the pension fund collapse, the bishop noted that the diocese is already in the midst of a bankruptcy process.

“If we are liable, then we’ll do what we can to make amends, given that they are one creditor as a group among many people accusing the Diocese of Albany,” O’Connell said, according to WAMC Northeast Public Radio. “And that’s what bankruptcy process is. We obviously cannot pay a billion dollars. Right? So that’s what Chapter 11 is all about, to figure out what’s fair. And since you have a bankruptcy judge and mediators, it’s not up to us.”

Later that day, the jury found the diocese not liable in the pension fund collapse lawsuit. The diocese issued a written statement, according to The Evangelist, that said: “As grateful as we are for the jury’s informed decision, we are still very much aware of the hurt felt by the St. Clare’s pensioners who cared for the sick and the poor throughout the long history of St. Clare’s Hospital. This does not mean that we will turn our backs to the pensioners, for as Bishop O’Connell has noted, they are a part of our flock; they are still in need of healing.”

That same day, lead plaintiff Mary Hartshorne, who worked in the hospital’s radiology department for about 28 years, told WNYT Channel 13 in Albany that she and other hospital retirees were pleased with the jury’s verdict but did not feel they would be made whole.

“We’ve been playing this game for seven and a half years, and I think my question I ask everybody is: How do you get that back? You don’t,” she said.

This story was first published by the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, and has been adapted by CNA.

Read More
HHS announces actions to restrict ‘sex-rejecting procedures’ on minors #Catholic President Donald J. Trump watches as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Health and Human Services Secretary, speaks after being sworn in on Thursday, Feb. 13, 2025, in Washington, D.C. / Credit: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 18, 2025 / 13:31 pm (CNA). The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) proposed regulations today that would seek to end “sex-rejecting procedures” on anyone younger than 18 years old, which includes restrictions on hospitals and retailers.Under one proposal, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) would withhold all funding through Medicare and Medicaid to any hospital that offers surgeries or drugs to minors as a means to make them resemble the opposite sex. The proposed rules would prohibit federal Medicaid funding for “sex-rejecting procedures” on anyone under 18 and prohibit federal Children’s Health Insurance program (CHIP) funding for the procedures on anyone under 19.This includes surgical operations, such as the removal of healthy genitals to replace them with artificial genitals that resemble the opposite sex and chest procedures that remove the healthy breasts on girls or implant prosthetic breasts on boys.It also includes hormone treatments that attempt to masculinize girls with testosterone and feminize boys with estrogen and puberty blockers, which delay a child’s natural developments during puberty.HHS also announced that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing warning letters to 12 manufacturers and retailers that they accuse of illegally marketing “breast binders” to girls under the age of 18 as a treatment for gender dysphoria. Breast binders compress breasts as a means to flatten them under their clothing.The news release said breast binders are Class 1 medical devices meant to help recover from cancer-related mastectomies, and the warning letters will “formally notify the companies of their significant regulatory violations and how they should take prompt corrective action.”Additionally, HHS is working to clarify the definition of a “disability” in civil rights regulations to exclude “gender dysphoria” that does not result from physical impairments. This ensures that discrimination laws are not interpreted in a way that would require “sex-rejecting procedures,” the statement said.HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a news conference that “sex-rejecting procedures” on minors are “endangering the very lives that [doctors] are sworn to safeguard.”“So-called gender-affirming care has inflicted lasting physical and psychological damage on vulnerable young people,” he said. “This is not medicine — it is malpractice.” The proposals would conform HHS regulations to President Donald Trump’s Jan. 28 executive order to prohibit the “chemical and surgical mutilation” of children. The order instructed HHS to propose regulations to prevent these procedures on minors.In a news release, HHS repeatedly referred to the medical interventions as “sex-rejecting procedures” and warned they “cause irreversible damage, including infertility, impaired sexual function, diminished bone density, altered brain development, and other irreversible physiological effects.”HHS cited its own report from May, which found “deep uncertainty about the purported benefits of these interventions” for treating a minor with gender dysphoria. The report found that “these interventions carry risk of significant harms,” which can include infertility, sexual dysfunction, underdeveloped bone mass, cardiovascular disease, metabolic disorders, psychiatric disorders, and adverse cognitive impacts, among other complications.Stanley Goldfarb, chairman of Do No Harm, a medical advocacy group, said in a statement that the proposed regulation on hospitals is “another critical step to protect children from harmful gender ideology” and said he supports rules that ensure “American taxpayer dollars do not fund sex-change operations on minors.”“Many so-called gender clinics have already begun to close as the truth about the risks and long-term harms about these drugs and surgeries on minors have been exposed,” he said. “Now, hospitals that receive taxpayer funds from these federal programs must follow suit.”Mary Rice Hasson, director of the Person and Identity Project at the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC), said she sees the proposed restriction on hospitals as “excellent.”“This proposed rule sends a powerful message to states and health care providers: It’s time to stop these unethical and dangerous procedures,” Hasson said. “Puberty is not a disease to be medicated away. All children have the right to grow and develop normally.”“Sex-rejecting procedures promise the impossible: that a child can escape the reality of being male or female,” she added. “In reality, these sex-rejecting procedures provide only the illusion of ‘changing sex’ by disabling healthy functions and altering the child’s healthy body through drugs and surgery that will cause lifelong harm.”In January, Bishop Robert Barron, chair of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life, and Youth, welcomed Trump’s executive action on these procedures, warning that they are “based on a false understanding of human nature, attempt to change a child’s sex.”“So many young people who have been victims of this ideological crusade have profound regrets over its life-altering consequences, such as infertility and lifelong dependence on costly hormone therapies that have significant side effects,” Barron said. “It is unacceptable that our children are encouraged to undergo destructive medical interventions instead of receiving access to authentic and bodily-unitive care.”
Read More

HHS announces actions to restrict ‘sex-rejecting procedures’ on minors #Catholic President Donald J. Trump watches as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Health and Human Services Secretary, speaks after being sworn in on Thursday, Feb. 13, 2025, in Washington, D.C. / Credit: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 18, 2025 / 13:31 pm (CNA). The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) proposed regulations today that would seek to end “sex-rejecting procedures” on anyone younger than 18 years old, which includes restrictions on hospitals and retailers.Under one proposal, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) would withhold all funding through Medicare and Medicaid to any hospital that offers surgeries or drugs to minors as a means to make them resemble the opposite sex. The proposed rules would prohibit federal Medicaid funding for “sex-rejecting procedures” on anyone under 18 and prohibit federal Children’s Health Insurance program (CHIP) funding for the procedures on anyone under 19.This includes surgical operations, such as the removal of healthy genitals to replace them with artificial genitals that resemble the opposite sex and chest procedures that remove the healthy breasts on girls or implant prosthetic breasts on boys.It also includes hormone treatments that attempt to masculinize girls with testosterone and feminize boys with estrogen and puberty blockers, which delay a child’s natural developments during puberty.HHS also announced that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing warning letters to 12 manufacturers and retailers that they accuse of illegally marketing “breast binders” to girls under the age of 18 as a treatment for gender dysphoria. Breast binders compress breasts as a means to flatten them under their clothing.The news release said breast binders are Class 1 medical devices meant to help recover from cancer-related mastectomies, and the warning letters will “formally notify the companies of their significant regulatory violations and how they should take prompt corrective action.”Additionally, HHS is working to clarify the definition of a “disability” in civil rights regulations to exclude “gender dysphoria” that does not result from physical impairments. This ensures that discrimination laws are not interpreted in a way that would require “sex-rejecting procedures,” the statement said.HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a news conference that “sex-rejecting procedures” on minors are “endangering the very lives that [doctors] are sworn to safeguard.”“So-called gender-affirming care has inflicted lasting physical and psychological damage on vulnerable young people,” he said. “This is not medicine — it is malpractice.” The proposals would conform HHS regulations to President Donald Trump’s Jan. 28 executive order to prohibit the “chemical and surgical mutilation” of children. The order instructed HHS to propose regulations to prevent these procedures on minors.In a news release, HHS repeatedly referred to the medical interventions as “sex-rejecting procedures” and warned they “cause irreversible damage, including infertility, impaired sexual function, diminished bone density, altered brain development, and other irreversible physiological effects.”HHS cited its own report from May, which found “deep uncertainty about the purported benefits of these interventions” for treating a minor with gender dysphoria. The report found that “these interventions carry risk of significant harms,” which can include infertility, sexual dysfunction, underdeveloped bone mass, cardiovascular disease, metabolic disorders, psychiatric disorders, and adverse cognitive impacts, among other complications.Stanley Goldfarb, chairman of Do No Harm, a medical advocacy group, said in a statement that the proposed regulation on hospitals is “another critical step to protect children from harmful gender ideology” and said he supports rules that ensure “American taxpayer dollars do not fund sex-change operations on minors.”“Many so-called gender clinics have already begun to close as the truth about the risks and long-term harms about these drugs and surgeries on minors have been exposed,” he said. “Now, hospitals that receive taxpayer funds from these federal programs must follow suit.”Mary Rice Hasson, director of the Person and Identity Project at the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC), said she sees the proposed restriction on hospitals as “excellent.”“This proposed rule sends a powerful message to states and health care providers: It’s time to stop these unethical and dangerous procedures,” Hasson said. “Puberty is not a disease to be medicated away. All children have the right to grow and develop normally.”“Sex-rejecting procedures promise the impossible: that a child can escape the reality of being male or female,” she added. “In reality, these sex-rejecting procedures provide only the illusion of ‘changing sex’ by disabling healthy functions and altering the child’s healthy body through drugs and surgery that will cause lifelong harm.”In January, Bishop Robert Barron, chair of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life, and Youth, welcomed Trump’s executive action on these procedures, warning that they are “based on a false understanding of human nature, attempt to change a child’s sex.”“So many young people who have been victims of this ideological crusade have profound regrets over its life-altering consequences, such as infertility and lifelong dependence on costly hormone therapies that have significant side effects,” Barron said. “It is unacceptable that our children are encouraged to undergo destructive medical interventions instead of receiving access to authentic and bodily-unitive care.”

unitedyam

President Donald J. Trump watches as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Health and Human Services Secretary, speaks after being sworn in on Thursday, Feb. 13, 2025, in Washington, D.C. / Credit: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 18, 2025 / 13:31 pm (CNA).

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) proposed regulations today that would seek to end “sex-rejecting procedures” on anyone younger than 18 years old, which includes restrictions on hospitals and retailers.

Under one proposal, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) would withhold all funding through Medicare and Medicaid to any hospital that offers surgeries or drugs to minors as a means to make them resemble the opposite sex. The proposed rules would prohibit federal Medicaid funding for “sex-rejecting procedures” on anyone under 18 and prohibit federal Children’s Health Insurance program (CHIP) funding for the procedures on anyone under 19.

This includes surgical operations, such as the removal of healthy genitals to replace them with artificial genitals that resemble the opposite sex and chest procedures that remove the healthy breasts on girls or implant prosthetic breasts on boys.

It also includes hormone treatments that attempt to masculinize girls with testosterone and feminize boys with estrogen and puberty blockers, which delay a child’s natural developments during puberty.

HHS also announced that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing warning letters to 12 manufacturers and retailers that they accuse of illegally marketing “breast binders” to girls under the age of 18 as a treatment for gender dysphoria. Breast binders compress breasts as a means to flatten them under their clothing.

The news release said breast binders are Class 1 medical devices meant to help recover from cancer-related mastectomies, and the warning letters will “formally notify the companies of their significant regulatory violations and how they should take prompt corrective action.”

Additionally, HHS is working to clarify the definition of a “disability” in civil rights regulations to exclude “gender dysphoria” that does not result from physical impairments. This ensures that discrimination laws are not interpreted in a way that would require “sex-rejecting procedures,” the statement said.

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a news conference that “sex-rejecting procedures” on minors are “endangering the very lives that [doctors] are sworn to safeguard.”

“So-called gender-affirming care has inflicted lasting physical and psychological damage on vulnerable young people,” he said. “This is not medicine — it is malpractice.” 

The proposals would conform HHS regulations to President Donald Trump’s Jan. 28 executive order to prohibit the “chemical and surgical mutilation” of children. The order instructed HHS to propose regulations to prevent these procedures on minors.

In a news release, HHS repeatedly referred to the medical interventions as “sex-rejecting procedures” and warned they “cause irreversible damage, including infertility, impaired sexual function, diminished bone density, altered brain development, and other irreversible physiological effects.”

HHS cited its own report from May, which found “deep uncertainty about the purported benefits of these interventions” for treating a minor with gender dysphoria. The report found that “these interventions carry risk of significant harms,” which can include infertility, sexual dysfunction, underdeveloped bone mass, cardiovascular disease, metabolic disorders, psychiatric disorders, and adverse cognitive impacts, among other complications.

Stanley Goldfarb, chairman of Do No Harm, a medical advocacy group, said in a statement that the proposed regulation on hospitals is “another critical step to protect children from harmful gender ideology” and said he supports rules that ensure “American taxpayer dollars do not fund sex-change operations on minors.”

“Many so-called gender clinics have already begun to close as the truth about the risks and long-term harms about these drugs and surgeries on minors have been exposed,” he said. “Now, hospitals that receive taxpayer funds from these federal programs must follow suit.”

Mary Rice Hasson, director of the Person and Identity Project at the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC), said she sees the proposed restriction on hospitals as “excellent.”

“This proposed rule sends a powerful message to states and health care providers: It’s time to stop these unethical and dangerous procedures,” Hasson said. “Puberty is not a disease to be medicated away. All children have the right to grow and develop normally.”

“Sex-rejecting procedures promise the impossible: that a child can escape the reality of being male or female,” she added. “In reality, these sex-rejecting procedures provide only the illusion of ‘changing sex’ by disabling healthy functions and altering the child’s healthy body through drugs and surgery that will cause lifelong harm.”

In January, Bishop Robert Barron, chair of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life, and Youth, welcomed Trump’s executive action on these procedures, warning that they are “based on a false understanding of human nature, attempt to change a child’s sex.”

“So many young people who have been victims of this ideological crusade have profound regrets over its life-altering consequences, such as infertility and lifelong dependence on costly hormone therapies that have significant side effects,” Barron said. “It is unacceptable that our children are encouraged to undergo destructive medical interventions instead of receiving access to authentic and bodily-unitive care.”

Read More