Drugs

Poll: 7 in 10 voters support requiring doctor’s visit for abortion pills #Catholic null / Credit: SibRapid/Shutterstock Denver, Colorado, Nov 1, 2025 / 07:19 am (CNA). Here is a roundup of recent pro-life and abortion-related news.7 in 10 voters support requiring doctor’s visit for abortion pills More than 7 in 10 voters believe a doctor’s visit should be required for a chemical abortion prescription, a recent poll found. The McLaughlin & Associates poll of 1,600 participants found that 71% of voters approved of a proposal “requiring a doctor’s visit in order for the chemical abortion drug to be prescribed to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.” The poll also found that 30% of voters had “significant concerns” about the safety of the abortion pill.  Current federal regulations allow providers to prescribe abortion drugs through telehealth and send them by mail. States like California even allow anonymous prescription of the abortion pill, and states including New York and California have “shield laws” that protect abortion providers who ship drugs into states where it is illegal. SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said this week, “The harmful impact of Biden’s FDA removing safeguards on abortion drugs, like in-person doctor visits, is an issue that overwhelmingly unites voters of all stripes.”“As a growing body of research indicates these drugs are far more dangerous than advertised, and new horror stories emerge day after day of women coerced and drugged against their will, landing in the ER and even dying along with their babies, Americans’ concerns are more than valid,” she said in an Oct. 28 statement.Dannenfelser urged the Trump administration to “heed the emerging science and the will of the people and immediately reinstate in-person doctor visits.” Texas AG Paxton secures win in Yelp’s targeting of pregnancy centersTexas Attorney General Ken Paxton secured an appellate court victory against Yelp, Inc. for allegedly adding misleading notices to pro-life pregnancy centers. Paxton filed the lawsuit after misleading notices were attached to the pages of crisis pregnancy centers. The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s dismissal, which had concluded that Texas did not have jurisdiction over Yelp because it is based in California. The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals concluded this week that the company is still “subject to specific jurisdiction in Texas” and that the concern is relevant to other states as well. “As evidenced by the number of attorneys general who signed the letter sent to Yelp, several states share Texas’s interest in ensuring that Crisis Pregnancy Centers are not the targets of actionable misleading statements,” Justice April Farris wrote in the opinion. Paxton said in a statement that Yelp tried to “steer users away from pro-life resources,” noting that Texas will keep Yelp accountable. Paxton pledged to “continue to defend pro-life organizations that serve Texans and make sure that women and families are receiving accurate information about our state’s resources.”Virginia superintendent denies that staff facilitated student abortionsA Virginia public school district has denied allegations that staff at a high school facilitated student abortions without parental consent or knowledge.In an Oct. 16 letter to families and staff at Centreville High School, Fairfax County Superintendent Michelle Reid said that internal investigations found that the “allegations are likely untrue” as “new details have emerged.” In the wake of an investigative report by a local blogger and accusations by a teacher on staff, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin instructed police to launch a criminal investigation. U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee as well as the U.S. Department of Education also launched investigations. Reid said that “such behavior would never be acceptable” in the school district, which “is fully cooperating with these government investigations.” Planned Parenthood Wisconsin resumes abortionsAfter a temporary pause this month, Wisconsin Planned Parenthood resumed providing abortions in the state by giving up its designation as an “essential community provider” under the Affordable Care Act. Planned Parenthood Wisconsin stopped offering abortions on Oct. 1, after President Donald Trump cut federal Medicaid funding for abortion providers. The yearlong pause is designed to prevent federal tax dollars from subsidizing organizations that provide abortions. Heather Weininger, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, said, “Planned Parenthood’s abortion-first business model underscores why taxpayer funding should never support organizations that make abortion a priority.”“Women in difficult circumstances deserve compassionate, life-affirming care — the kind of support the pro-life movement is committed to offering,” she said in an Oct. 27 statement.  Ohio cuts medicaid contract with Planned Parenthood Ohio has terminated Medicaid provider contracts with Planned Parenthood, preventing state funds from going to the abortion giant there.The Ohio Department of Medicaid cited Trump’s recent yearlong pause on Medicaid reimbursements to abortion providers as the reason for termination. Planned Parenthood has since requested a hearing with the department to oppose the termination. Whether the state’s decision to end the agreement will extend longer than the federal pause is unclear.
Read More

Poll: 7 in 10 voters support requiring doctor’s visit for abortion pills #Catholic null / Credit: SibRapid/Shutterstock Denver, Colorado, Nov 1, 2025 / 07:19 am (CNA). Here is a roundup of recent pro-life and abortion-related news.7 in 10 voters support requiring doctor’s visit for abortion pills More than 7 in 10 voters believe a doctor’s visit should be required for a chemical abortion prescription, a recent poll found. The McLaughlin & Associates poll of 1,600 participants found that 71% of voters approved of a proposal “requiring a doctor’s visit in order for the chemical abortion drug to be prescribed to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.” The poll also found that 30% of voters had “significant concerns” about the safety of the abortion pill.  Current federal regulations allow providers to prescribe abortion drugs through telehealth and send them by mail. States like California even allow anonymous prescription of the abortion pill, and states including New York and California have “shield laws” that protect abortion providers who ship drugs into states where it is illegal. SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said this week, “The harmful impact of Biden’s FDA removing safeguards on abortion drugs, like in-person doctor visits, is an issue that overwhelmingly unites voters of all stripes.”“As a growing body of research indicates these drugs are far more dangerous than advertised, and new horror stories emerge day after day of women coerced and drugged against their will, landing in the ER and even dying along with their babies, Americans’ concerns are more than valid,” she said in an Oct. 28 statement.Dannenfelser urged the Trump administration to “heed the emerging science and the will of the people and immediately reinstate in-person doctor visits.” Texas AG Paxton secures win in Yelp’s targeting of pregnancy centersTexas Attorney General Ken Paxton secured an appellate court victory against Yelp, Inc. for allegedly adding misleading notices to pro-life pregnancy centers. Paxton filed the lawsuit after misleading notices were attached to the pages of crisis pregnancy centers. The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s dismissal, which had concluded that Texas did not have jurisdiction over Yelp because it is based in California. The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals concluded this week that the company is still “subject to specific jurisdiction in Texas” and that the concern is relevant to other states as well. “As evidenced by the number of attorneys general who signed the letter sent to Yelp, several states share Texas’s interest in ensuring that Crisis Pregnancy Centers are not the targets of actionable misleading statements,” Justice April Farris wrote in the opinion. Paxton said in a statement that Yelp tried to “steer users away from pro-life resources,” noting that Texas will keep Yelp accountable. Paxton pledged to “continue to defend pro-life organizations that serve Texans and make sure that women and families are receiving accurate information about our state’s resources.”Virginia superintendent denies that staff facilitated student abortionsA Virginia public school district has denied allegations that staff at a high school facilitated student abortions without parental consent or knowledge.In an Oct. 16 letter to families and staff at Centreville High School, Fairfax County Superintendent Michelle Reid said that internal investigations found that the “allegations are likely untrue” as “new details have emerged.” In the wake of an investigative report by a local blogger and accusations by a teacher on staff, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin instructed police to launch a criminal investigation. U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee as well as the U.S. Department of Education also launched investigations. Reid said that “such behavior would never be acceptable” in the school district, which “is fully cooperating with these government investigations.” Planned Parenthood Wisconsin resumes abortionsAfter a temporary pause this month, Wisconsin Planned Parenthood resumed providing abortions in the state by giving up its designation as an “essential community provider” under the Affordable Care Act. Planned Parenthood Wisconsin stopped offering abortions on Oct. 1, after President Donald Trump cut federal Medicaid funding for abortion providers. The yearlong pause is designed to prevent federal tax dollars from subsidizing organizations that provide abortions. Heather Weininger, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, said, “Planned Parenthood’s abortion-first business model underscores why taxpayer funding should never support organizations that make abortion a priority.”“Women in difficult circumstances deserve compassionate, life-affirming care — the kind of support the pro-life movement is committed to offering,” she said in an Oct. 27 statement.  Ohio cuts medicaid contract with Planned Parenthood Ohio has terminated Medicaid provider contracts with Planned Parenthood, preventing state funds from going to the abortion giant there.The Ohio Department of Medicaid cited Trump’s recent yearlong pause on Medicaid reimbursements to abortion providers as the reason for termination. Planned Parenthood has since requested a hearing with the department to oppose the termination. Whether the state’s decision to end the agreement will extend longer than the federal pause is unclear.

unitedyam

null / Credit: SibRapid/Shutterstock

Denver, Colorado, Nov 1, 2025 / 07:19 am (CNA).

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

7 in 10 voters support requiring doctor’s visit for abortion pills 

More than 7 in 10 voters believe a doctor’s visit should be required for a chemical abortion prescription, a recent poll found. 

The McLaughlin & Associates poll of 1,600 participants found that 71% of voters approved of a proposal “requiring a doctor’s visit in order for the chemical abortion drug to be prescribed to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.” 

The poll also found that 30% of voters had “significant concerns” about the safety of the abortion pill.  

Current federal regulations allow providers to prescribe abortion drugs through telehealth and send them by mail. 

States like California even allow anonymous prescription of the abortion pill, and states including New York and California have “shield laws” that protect abortion providers who ship drugs into states where it is illegal. 

SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said this week, “The harmful impact of Biden’s FDA removing safeguards on abortion drugs, like in-person doctor visits, is an issue that overwhelmingly unites voters of all stripes.”

“As a growing body of research indicates these drugs are far more dangerous than advertised, and new horror stories emerge day after day of women coerced and drugged against their will, landing in the ER and even dying along with their babies, Americans’ concerns are more than valid,” she said in an Oct. 28 statement.

Dannenfelser urged the Trump administration to “heed the emerging science and the will of the people and immediately reinstate in-person doctor visits.” 

Texas AG Paxton secures win in Yelp’s targeting of pregnancy centers

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton secured an appellate court victory against Yelp, Inc. for allegedly adding misleading notices to pro-life pregnancy centers. 

Paxton filed the lawsuit after misleading notices were attached to the pages of crisis pregnancy centers. The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s dismissal, which had concluded that Texas did not have jurisdiction over Yelp because it is based in California. 

The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals concluded this week that the company is still “subject to specific jurisdiction in Texas” and that the concern is relevant to other states as well. 

“As evidenced by the number of attorneys general who signed the letter sent to Yelp, several states share Texas’s interest in ensuring that Crisis Pregnancy Centers are not the targets of actionable misleading statements,” Justice April Farris wrote in the opinion. 

Paxton said in a statement that Yelp tried to “steer users away from pro-life resources,” noting that Texas will keep Yelp accountable. 

Paxton pledged to “continue to defend pro-life organizations that serve Texans and make sure that women and families are receiving accurate information about our state’s resources.”

Virginia superintendent denies that staff facilitated student abortions

A Virginia public school district has denied allegations that staff at a high school facilitated student abortions without parental consent or knowledge.

In an Oct. 16 letter to families and staff at Centreville High School, Fairfax County Superintendent Michelle Reid said that internal investigations found that the “allegations are likely untrue” as “new details have emerged.” 

In the wake of an investigative report by a local blogger and accusations by a teacher on staff, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin instructed police to launch a criminal investigation. U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee as well as the U.S. Department of Education also launched investigations. 

Reid said that “such behavior would never be acceptable” in the school district, which “is fully cooperating with these government investigations.” 

Planned Parenthood Wisconsin resumes abortions

After a temporary pause this month, Wisconsin Planned Parenthood resumed providing abortions in the state by giving up its designation as an “essential community provider” under the Affordable Care Act. 

Planned Parenthood Wisconsin stopped offering abortions on Oct. 1, after President Donald Trump cut federal Medicaid funding for abortion providers. The yearlong pause is designed to prevent federal tax dollars from subsidizing organizations that provide abortions. 

Heather Weininger, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, said, “Planned Parenthood’s abortion-first business model underscores why taxpayer funding should never support organizations that make abortion a priority.”

“Women in difficult circumstances deserve compassionate, life-affirming care — the kind of support the pro-life movement is committed to offering,” she said in an Oct. 27 statement.  

Ohio cuts medicaid contract with Planned Parenthood 

Ohio has terminated Medicaid provider contracts with Planned Parenthood, preventing state funds from going to the abortion giant there.

The Ohio Department of Medicaid cited Trump’s recent yearlong pause on Medicaid reimbursements to abortion providers as the reason for termination. Planned Parenthood has since requested a hearing with the department to oppose the termination. Whether the state’s decision to end the agreement will extend longer than the federal pause is unclear.

Read More
Illinois Senate passes assisted suicide measure #Catholic null / Credit: Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 31, 2025 / 14:53 pm (CNA). The Illinois State Senate passed a bill to legalize physician-assisted suicide in the state. The legislation (SB 1950), known as the “End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act,” would authorize medical aid in dying for terminally ill adults in Illinois if signed into law by Democrat Gov. J.B. Pritzker.The House passed the bill in May 2025, and it stalled in the Senate during the regular session. It was taken up during the Fall veto session, and senators passed it early in the morning of Oct. 31. Pritzker will have 60 days to decide whether to sign or veto the bill before it automatically becomes law.The bill would allow individuals to request and self-administer medication to end their lives. According to the bill, anyone requesting medically assisted suicide must be at least 18 years old, a resident of Illinois, and have a terminal disease with a prognosis of six months or less to live.The bill also requires two verbal requests for the medication from the patient, with a five-day waiting period between the first and second request. The death certificates of individuals using physican-assisted suicide in the state would list the terminal disease as the cause of death, not suicide. “Please continue to pray for vulnerable populations and for those who feel hopeless and are near end-of-life,” the Catholic Conference of Illinois, the public policy voice of the Catholic Church in the state, wrote in a post to the social media platform X.”It is quite fitting that the forces of the culture of death in the Illinois General Assembly passed physician-assisted suicide on October 31—a day that, culturally, has become synonymous with glorifying death and evil,” said Bishop Thomas John Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield in a statement. “It’s also ironic that these pro-death legislators did it under the cloud of darkness at 2:54 a.m.”“Doctors take an oath to do no harm. Now, they can prescribe death. There are documented cases of patients being denied treatment and instead offered life-ending drugs,” Paprocki said. “Individuals could also be coerced into taking the lethal drug.”The bishop called for prayers for Pritzker to reject the legislation as “physician assisted suicide undermines the value of each person, especially the vulnerable, the poor, and those with disabilities.”The anti-assisted suicide group Patients Rights Action Fund called on Pritzker to veto the legislation. “We encourage lawmakers to instead prioritize expanding access to mental health services, hospice care, and palliative support,” the advocacy group said in a statement. “Every patient deserves compassionate care and a full spectrum of options to live with dignity. The passage of SB 1950 introducing the use of lethal drugs in Illinois compromises that fundamental right. “Cardinal Blase Cupich, the archbishop of Chicago, strongly criticized the bill in May after it passed the House.“I speak to this topic not only as a religious leader but also as one who has seen a parent die from a debilitating illness,” Cupich said, recalling his father’s death. Cupich urged Illinois to promote “compassionate care,” not assisted suicide. “There is a way to both honor the dignity of human life and provide compassionate care to those experiencing life-ending illness,” Cupich said. “Surely the Illinois Legislature should explore those options before making suicide one of the avenues available to the ill and distressed.” The Catholic Conference of Illinois also asked the governor to veto the bill and improve palliative care programs “that offer expert assessment and management of pain and other symptoms.”“The Illinois General Assembly has put our state on a slippery path that jeopardizes the well-being of the poor and marginalized, especially those in the disability community and have foreseeable tragic consequences,” the conference said in a statement. 
Read More

Illinois Senate passes assisted suicide measure #Catholic null / Credit: Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 31, 2025 / 14:53 pm (CNA). The Illinois State Senate passed a bill to legalize physician-assisted suicide in the state. The legislation (SB 1950), known as the “End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act,” would authorize medical aid in dying for terminally ill adults in Illinois if signed into law by Democrat Gov. J.B. Pritzker.The House passed the bill in May 2025, and it stalled in the Senate during the regular session. It was taken up during the Fall veto session, and senators passed it early in the morning of Oct. 31. Pritzker will have 60 days to decide whether to sign or veto the bill before it automatically becomes law.The bill would allow individuals to request and self-administer medication to end their lives. According to the bill, anyone requesting medically assisted suicide must be at least 18 years old, a resident of Illinois, and have a terminal disease with a prognosis of six months or less to live.The bill also requires two verbal requests for the medication from the patient, with a five-day waiting period between the first and second request. The death certificates of individuals using physican-assisted suicide in the state would list the terminal disease as the cause of death, not suicide. “Please continue to pray for vulnerable populations and for those who feel hopeless and are near end-of-life,” the Catholic Conference of Illinois, the public policy voice of the Catholic Church in the state, wrote in a post to the social media platform X.”It is quite fitting that the forces of the culture of death in the Illinois General Assembly passed physician-assisted suicide on October 31—a day that, culturally, has become synonymous with glorifying death and evil,” said Bishop Thomas John Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield in a statement. “It’s also ironic that these pro-death legislators did it under the cloud of darkness at 2:54 a.m.”“Doctors take an oath to do no harm. Now, they can prescribe death. There are documented cases of patients being denied treatment and instead offered life-ending drugs,” Paprocki said. “Individuals could also be coerced into taking the lethal drug.”The bishop called for prayers for Pritzker to reject the legislation as “physician assisted suicide undermines the value of each person, especially the vulnerable, the poor, and those with disabilities.”The anti-assisted suicide group Patients Rights Action Fund called on Pritzker to veto the legislation. “We encourage lawmakers to instead prioritize expanding access to mental health services, hospice care, and palliative support,” the advocacy group said in a statement. “Every patient deserves compassionate care and a full spectrum of options to live with dignity. The passage of SB 1950 introducing the use of lethal drugs in Illinois compromises that fundamental right. “Cardinal Blase Cupich, the archbishop of Chicago, strongly criticized the bill in May after it passed the House.“I speak to this topic not only as a religious leader but also as one who has seen a parent die from a debilitating illness,” Cupich said, recalling his father’s death. Cupich urged Illinois to promote “compassionate care,” not assisted suicide. “There is a way to both honor the dignity of human life and provide compassionate care to those experiencing life-ending illness,” Cupich said. “Surely the Illinois Legislature should explore those options before making suicide one of the avenues available to the ill and distressed.” The Catholic Conference of Illinois also asked the governor to veto the bill and improve palliative care programs “that offer expert assessment and management of pain and other symptoms.”“The Illinois General Assembly has put our state on a slippery path that jeopardizes the well-being of the poor and marginalized, especially those in the disability community and have foreseeable tragic consequences,” the conference said in a statement. 

unitedyam

null / Credit: Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 31, 2025 / 14:53 pm (CNA).

The Illinois State Senate passed a bill to legalize physician-assisted suicide in the state. 

The legislation (SB 1950), known as the “End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act,” would authorize medical aid in dying for terminally ill adults in Illinois if signed into law by Democrat Gov. J.B. Pritzker.

The House passed the bill in May 2025, and it stalled in the Senate during the regular session. It was taken up during the Fall veto session, and senators passed it early in the morning of Oct. 31. Pritzker will have 60 days to decide whether to sign or veto the bill before it automatically becomes law.

The bill would allow individuals to request and self-administer medication to end their lives. According to the bill, anyone requesting medically assisted suicide must be at least 18 years old, a resident of Illinois, and have a terminal disease with a prognosis of six months or less to live.

The bill also requires two verbal requests for the medication from the patient, with a five-day waiting period between the first and second request. The death certificates of individuals using physican-assisted suicide in the state would list the terminal disease as the cause of death, not suicide. 

“Please continue to pray for vulnerable populations and for those who feel hopeless and are near end-of-life,” the Catholic Conference of Illinois, the public policy voice of the Catholic Church in the state, wrote in a post to the social media platform X.

“It is quite fitting that the forces of the culture of death in the Illinois General Assembly passed physician-assisted suicide on October 31—a day that, culturally, has become synonymous with glorifying death and evil,” said Bishop Thomas John Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield in a statement. “It’s also ironic that these pro-death legislators did it under the cloud of darkness at 2:54 a.m.”

“Doctors take an oath to do no harm. Now, they can prescribe death. There are documented cases of patients being denied treatment and instead offered life-ending drugs,” Paprocki said. “Individuals could also be coerced into taking the lethal drug.”

The bishop called for prayers for Pritzker to reject the legislation as “physician assisted suicide undermines the value of each person, especially the vulnerable, the poor, and those with disabilities.”

The anti-assisted suicide group Patients Rights Action Fund called on Pritzker to veto the legislation. 

“We encourage lawmakers to instead prioritize expanding access to mental health services, hospice care, and palliative support,” the advocacy group said in a statement. “Every patient deserves compassionate care and a full spectrum of options to live with dignity. The passage of SB 1950 introducing the use of lethal drugs in Illinois compromises that fundamental right. “

Cardinal Blase Cupich, the archbishop of Chicago, strongly criticized the bill in May after it passed the House.

“I speak to this topic not only as a religious leader but also as one who has seen a parent die from a debilitating illness,” Cupich said, recalling his father’s death. Cupich urged Illinois to promote “compassionate care,” not assisted suicide. 

“There is a way to both honor the dignity of human life and provide compassionate care to those experiencing life-ending illness,” Cupich said. “Surely the Illinois Legislature should explore those options before making suicide one of the avenues available to the ill and distressed.” 

The Catholic Conference of Illinois also asked the governor to veto the bill and improve palliative care programs “that offer expert assessment and management of pain and other symptoms.”

“The Illinois General Assembly has put our state on a slippery path that jeopardizes the well-being of the poor and marginalized, especially those in the disability community and have foreseeable tragic consequences,” the conference said in a statement. 

Read More
State-level religious freedom protections grow in recent years #Catholic Thirty states have adopted some version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) first signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. / Credit: Leigh Prather/Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 21, 2025 / 17:56 pm (CNA). Protections for religious freedom in the U.S. have grown in recent years with multiple states adopting laws to strengthen the constitutional right to freely exercise one’s religion.As of 2025, 30 states have adopted a version of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) or similar legislative protection for religious freedom. The most recent states to adopt those protections for state-level laws were Georgia and Wyoming in 2025 and Iowa, Utah, and Nebraska in 2024. West Virginia and North Dakota adopted them in 2023 and South Dakota and Montana did the same in 2021.RFRA was first adopted in 1993, when then-President Bill Clinton signed it into law to expand religious freedom protections. Under the law, the federal government cannot “substantially burden” the free exercise of religion unless there is a “compelling government interest” and it is carried out in the “least restrictive” means possible.Congress passed the law in response to the 1990 Supreme Court decision in Employment Division v. Smith, which asserted that the First Amendment was not violated as long as a law was “neutral and generally applicable.” The law was intended to provide a stronger safeguard for the free exercise of religion than what was provided by the highest court. Bipartisan consensus gone, but opposition weakeningWhen RFRA was adopted at the federal level in the 1990s, the protections had overwhelming bipartisan support. In the 2010s, that bipartisan consensus waned as most Democrats voiced opposition to the protections.Tim Schultz, the president of the 1st Amendment Partnership, told CNA that in 2013, two states adopted RFRA with nearly unanimous support from Republicans and about two-thirds support from Democrats. However, the law became more divisive after the 2014 Supreme Court ruling in favor of exempting Hobby Lobby from a mandate to provide abortifacient drugs based on RFRA.“That [bipartisan support] seems like a million years ago,” Schultz said. “Now I would say Republican support is about the same as it was then. Democratic support is under 5%.”Although Schultz did not express optimism that bipartisan support could return any time soon, he credited some cultural shifts for the strong success in Republican-leaning states over the past four years.From 2014 through 2020, he said business groups and LGBT groups “were working together very strongly … in opposition to religious freedom bills” because they saw them as threats to certain anti-discrimination laws related to workplace policies from religious employers.However, post-2020, he said, “the politics of RFRA are far more favorable,” and he noted there has been “far less opposition from business groups.”One reason for this change, according to Schultz, was the widely-published story of NCAA championship swimmer Lia Thomas, a biologically male swimmer who identified as a transgender woman and competed in women’s sports. This led polling to “change on every issue related to LGBT,” he noted.Another reason, he argued, was the response to transgender-related policies by Target and the Bud Light ads, which led to “consumer anger at both of them.” He noted the money lost by the corporations “made business groups say ‘we are not going to have the same posture.’”In spite of the partisanship that fuels the current debate, Schultz noted RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on a wide range of issues, some of which have pleased conservatives and others that have pleased progressives.Although RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on issues related to contraception, abortion, gender, and sexuality, it has also been used to defend religious organizations that provide services for migrants. “[RFRA is] not politically predictable,” Schultz said.
Read More

State-level religious freedom protections grow in recent years #Catholic Thirty states have adopted some version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) first signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. / Credit: Leigh Prather/Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 21, 2025 / 17:56 pm (CNA). Protections for religious freedom in the U.S. have grown in recent years with multiple states adopting laws to strengthen the constitutional right to freely exercise one’s religion.As of 2025, 30 states have adopted a version of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) or similar legislative protection for religious freedom. The most recent states to adopt those protections for state-level laws were Georgia and Wyoming in 2025 and Iowa, Utah, and Nebraska in 2024. West Virginia and North Dakota adopted them in 2023 and South Dakota and Montana did the same in 2021.RFRA was first adopted in 1993, when then-President Bill Clinton signed it into law to expand religious freedom protections. Under the law, the federal government cannot “substantially burden” the free exercise of religion unless there is a “compelling government interest” and it is carried out in the “least restrictive” means possible.Congress passed the law in response to the 1990 Supreme Court decision in Employment Division v. Smith, which asserted that the First Amendment was not violated as long as a law was “neutral and generally applicable.” The law was intended to provide a stronger safeguard for the free exercise of religion than what was provided by the highest court. Bipartisan consensus gone, but opposition weakeningWhen RFRA was adopted at the federal level in the 1990s, the protections had overwhelming bipartisan support. In the 2010s, that bipartisan consensus waned as most Democrats voiced opposition to the protections.Tim Schultz, the president of the 1st Amendment Partnership, told CNA that in 2013, two states adopted RFRA with nearly unanimous support from Republicans and about two-thirds support from Democrats. However, the law became more divisive after the 2014 Supreme Court ruling in favor of exempting Hobby Lobby from a mandate to provide abortifacient drugs based on RFRA.“That [bipartisan support] seems like a million years ago,” Schultz said. “Now I would say Republican support is about the same as it was then. Democratic support is under 5%.”Although Schultz did not express optimism that bipartisan support could return any time soon, he credited some cultural shifts for the strong success in Republican-leaning states over the past four years.From 2014 through 2020, he said business groups and LGBT groups “were working together very strongly … in opposition to religious freedom bills” because they saw them as threats to certain anti-discrimination laws related to workplace policies from religious employers.However, post-2020, he said, “the politics of RFRA are far more favorable,” and he noted there has been “far less opposition from business groups.”One reason for this change, according to Schultz, was the widely-published story of NCAA championship swimmer Lia Thomas, a biologically male swimmer who identified as a transgender woman and competed in women’s sports. This led polling to “change on every issue related to LGBT,” he noted.Another reason, he argued, was the response to transgender-related policies by Target and the Bud Light ads, which led to “consumer anger at both of them.” He noted the money lost by the corporations “made business groups say ‘we are not going to have the same posture.’”In spite of the partisanship that fuels the current debate, Schultz noted RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on a wide range of issues, some of which have pleased conservatives and others that have pleased progressives.Although RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on issues related to contraception, abortion, gender, and sexuality, it has also been used to defend religious organizations that provide services for migrants. “[RFRA is] not politically predictable,” Schultz said.

unitedyam

Thirty states have adopted some version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) first signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. / Credit: Leigh Prather/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 21, 2025 / 17:56 pm (CNA).

Protections for religious freedom in the U.S. have grown in recent years with multiple states adopting laws to strengthen the constitutional right to freely exercise one’s religion.

As of 2025, 30 states have adopted a version of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) or similar legislative protection for religious freedom. 

The most recent states to adopt those protections for state-level laws were Georgia and Wyoming in 2025 and Iowa, Utah, and Nebraska in 2024. West Virginia and North Dakota adopted them in 2023 and South Dakota and Montana did the same in 2021.

RFRA was first adopted in 1993, when then-President Bill Clinton signed it into law to expand religious freedom protections. Under the law, the federal government cannot “substantially burden” the free exercise of religion unless there is a “compelling government interest” and it is carried out in the “least restrictive” means possible.

Congress passed the law in response to the 1990 Supreme Court decision in Employment Division v. Smith, which asserted that the First Amendment was not violated as long as a law was “neutral and generally applicable.” The law was intended to provide a stronger safeguard for the free exercise of religion than what was provided by the highest court. 

Bipartisan consensus gone, but opposition weakening

When RFRA was adopted at the federal level in the 1990s, the protections had overwhelming bipartisan support. In the 2010s, that bipartisan consensus waned as most Democrats voiced opposition to the protections.

Tim Schultz, the president of the 1st Amendment Partnership, told CNA that in 2013, two states adopted RFRA with nearly unanimous support from Republicans and about two-thirds support from Democrats. However, the law became more divisive after the 2014 Supreme Court ruling in favor of exempting Hobby Lobby from a mandate to provide abortifacient drugs based on RFRA.

“That [bipartisan support] seems like a million years ago,” Schultz said. “Now I would say Republican support is about the same as it was then. Democratic support is under 5%.”

Although Schultz did not express optimism that bipartisan support could return any time soon, he credited some cultural shifts for the strong success in Republican-leaning states over the past four years.

From 2014 through 2020, he said business groups and LGBT groups “were working together very strongly … in opposition to religious freedom bills” because they saw them as threats to certain anti-discrimination laws related to workplace policies from religious employers.

However, post-2020, he said, “the politics of RFRA are far more favorable,” and he noted there has been “far less opposition from business groups.”

One reason for this change, according to Schultz, was the widely-published story of NCAA championship swimmer Lia Thomas, a biologically male swimmer who identified as a transgender woman and competed in women’s sports. This led polling to “change on every issue related to LGBT,” he noted.

Another reason, he argued, was the response to transgender-related policies by Target and the Bud Light ads, which led to “consumer anger at both of them.” He noted the money lost by the corporations “made business groups say ‘we are not going to have the same posture.’”

In spite of the partisanship that fuels the current debate, Schultz noted RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on a wide range of issues, some of which have pleased conservatives and others that have pleased progressives.

Although RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on issues related to contraception, abortion, gender, and sexuality, it has also been used to defend religious organizations that provide services for migrants. 

“[RFRA is] not politically predictable,” Schultz said.

Read More
Trump administration expands IVF and other fertility treatment coverage #Catholic The Trump administration will expand access to in vitro fertilization drugs and procedures. / Credit: sejianni/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Oct 16, 2025 / 18:53 pm (CNA). President Donald Trump is expanding access to in vitro fertilization and other fertility treatments by partnering with pharmaceutical companies and expanding insurance options. According to a White House announcement on Oct. 16, the Trump administration is working with major pharmaceutical companies to bring IVF drugs to the U.S. at lower prices. The administration is also expanding insurance coverage for fertility care.The agreement with leading pharmaceutical group EMD Serono will make IVF drugs available “at very, very heavily reduced prices — prices that you won’t even believe,” Trump said on Thursday in a livestream from the Oval Office. According to the announcement, women who buy directly from TrumpRx.gov, a website that will launch in January 2026, will get a discount equivalent to 796% of the negotiated price for GONAL-F, a widely used fertility drug.The FDA will also be expediting its review of an IVF drug that is not yet available in the U.S., which Trump said “would directly compete against a much more expensive option that currently has a monopoly in the American market, and this will bring down costs very significantly.”In addition, the Trump administration will enable employers to offer separate plans for fertility issues, comparable to the standard life, dental, and vision plans typically available from employers.“This will make all fertility care, including IVF, far more affordable and accessible,” Trump said. “And by providing coverage at every step of the way, it will reduce the number of people who ultimately need to resort to IVF, because couples will be able to identify and address problems early.” “The result will be healthier pregnancies, healthier babies, and many more beautiful American children,” Trump continued. These fertility benefits will include both IVF and other fertility treatments “that address the root causes of infertility,” according to the Oct. 16 announcement. “There’s no deeper happiness and joy [than] raising children, and now millions of Americans struggling with infertility will have a new chance to share the greatest experience of them all,” Trump said. IVF is a fertility treatment opposed by the Catholic Church in which doctors fuse sperm and eggs in a laboratory to create human embryos and implant them in the mother’s womb. To maximize efficiency, doctors create excess human embryos and freeze them. Undesired embryos are routinely destroyed or used in scientific research.Lila Rose, a devout Catholic and founder of the pro-life group Live Action, condemned the administration’s action, noting that “IVF kills more babies than abortion.”“Millions of embryos are frozen, discarded, or destroyed,” Rose said in a post on X on Oct. 16.“Only 7% of embryos created survive to birth,” she said. IVF is “not a solution to fertility struggles.”      In response to Trump’s announcement, the March for Life celebrated the White House’s focus on children and fertility, while cautioning the administration to protect human life at all its stages, even as embryos. “March for Life appreciates that President Trump has heard and is responding to so many Americans who dream of becoming parents,” the March for Life said in a statement shared with CNA. “The desire for parenthood is natural and good. Children are a blessing. Life is a gift. The White House’s announcement today is rooted in these core truths.” The March for Life noted that “every human life is precious — no matter the circumstances” and urged policymakers to protect human life. “We continue to encourage any federal government policymaking surrounding IVF to prioritize protecting human life in its earliest stages and to fully align with basic standards of medical ethics,” the statement read. The group also welcomed “the administration’s commitment to making groundbreaking advancements in restorative reproductive medicine more accessible and available to American women.”  Catholic institutes such as the Saint Paul VI Institute have pioneered a form of restorative reproductive medicine called NaProTechnology. “Naprotech” aims to discover and address the root cause of fertility issues via treatment and surgery if necessary. Some conditions that can affect fertility include endometriosis — which affects nearly 1 in 10 women — and polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), the leading cause of infertility.“RRM aims to resolve rather than ignore underlying medical issues, increasing health and wellness while also restoring fertility, and responding to the beautiful desire for children while avoiding any collateral loss of human life,” March for Life stated.
Read More

Trump administration expands IVF and other fertility treatment coverage #Catholic The Trump administration will expand access to in vitro fertilization drugs and procedures. / Credit: sejianni/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Oct 16, 2025 / 18:53 pm (CNA). President Donald Trump is expanding access to in vitro fertilization and other fertility treatments by partnering with pharmaceutical companies and expanding insurance options. According to a White House announcement on Oct. 16, the Trump administration is working with major pharmaceutical companies to bring IVF drugs to the U.S. at lower prices. The administration is also expanding insurance coverage for fertility care.The agreement with leading pharmaceutical group EMD Serono will make IVF drugs available “at very, very heavily reduced prices — prices that you won’t even believe,” Trump said on Thursday in a livestream from the Oval Office. According to the announcement, women who buy directly from TrumpRx.gov, a website that will launch in January 2026, will get a discount equivalent to 796% of the negotiated price for GONAL-F, a widely used fertility drug.The FDA will also be expediting its review of an IVF drug that is not yet available in the U.S., which Trump said “would directly compete against a much more expensive option that currently has a monopoly in the American market, and this will bring down costs very significantly.”In addition, the Trump administration will enable employers to offer separate plans for fertility issues, comparable to the standard life, dental, and vision plans typically available from employers.“This will make all fertility care, including IVF, far more affordable and accessible,” Trump said. “And by providing coverage at every step of the way, it will reduce the number of people who ultimately need to resort to IVF, because couples will be able to identify and address problems early.” “The result will be healthier pregnancies, healthier babies, and many more beautiful American children,” Trump continued. These fertility benefits will include both IVF and other fertility treatments “that address the root causes of infertility,” according to the Oct. 16 announcement. “There’s no deeper happiness and joy [than] raising children, and now millions of Americans struggling with infertility will have a new chance to share the greatest experience of them all,” Trump said. IVF is a fertility treatment opposed by the Catholic Church in which doctors fuse sperm and eggs in a laboratory to create human embryos and implant them in the mother’s womb. To maximize efficiency, doctors create excess human embryos and freeze them. Undesired embryos are routinely destroyed or used in scientific research.Lila Rose, a devout Catholic and founder of the pro-life group Live Action, condemned the administration’s action, noting that “IVF kills more babies than abortion.”“Millions of embryos are frozen, discarded, or destroyed,” Rose said in a post on X on Oct. 16.“Only 7% of embryos created survive to birth,” she said. IVF is “not a solution to fertility struggles.”      In response to Trump’s announcement, the March for Life celebrated the White House’s focus on children and fertility, while cautioning the administration to protect human life at all its stages, even as embryos. “March for Life appreciates that President Trump has heard and is responding to so many Americans who dream of becoming parents,” the March for Life said in a statement shared with CNA. “The desire for parenthood is natural and good. Children are a blessing. Life is a gift. The White House’s announcement today is rooted in these core truths.” The March for Life noted that “every human life is precious — no matter the circumstances” and urged policymakers to protect human life. “We continue to encourage any federal government policymaking surrounding IVF to prioritize protecting human life in its earliest stages and to fully align with basic standards of medical ethics,” the statement read. The group also welcomed “the administration’s commitment to making groundbreaking advancements in restorative reproductive medicine more accessible and available to American women.”  Catholic institutes such as the Saint Paul VI Institute have pioneered a form of restorative reproductive medicine called NaProTechnology. “Naprotech” aims to discover and address the root cause of fertility issues via treatment and surgery if necessary. Some conditions that can affect fertility include endometriosis — which affects nearly 1 in 10 women — and polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), the leading cause of infertility.“RRM aims to resolve rather than ignore underlying medical issues, increasing health and wellness while also restoring fertility, and responding to the beautiful desire for children while avoiding any collateral loss of human life,” March for Life stated.

unitedyam

The Trump administration will expand access to in vitro fertilization drugs and procedures. / Credit: sejianni/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Oct 16, 2025 / 18:53 pm (CNA).

President Donald Trump is expanding access to in vitro fertilization and other fertility treatments by partnering with pharmaceutical companies and expanding insurance options. 

According to a White House announcement on Oct. 16, the Trump administration is working with major pharmaceutical companies to bring IVF drugs to the U.S. at lower prices. The administration is also expanding insurance coverage for fertility care.

The agreement with leading pharmaceutical group EMD Serono will make IVF drugs available “at very, very heavily reduced prices — prices that you won’t even believe,” Trump said on Thursday in a livestream from the Oval Office. 

According to the announcement, women who buy directly from TrumpRx.gov, a website that will launch in January 2026, will get a discount equivalent to 796% of the negotiated price for GONAL-F, a widely used fertility drug.

The FDA will also be expediting its review of an IVF drug that is not yet available in the U.S., which Trump said “would directly compete against a much more expensive option that currently has a monopoly in the American market, and this will bring down costs very significantly.”

In addition, the Trump administration will enable employers to offer separate plans for fertility issues, comparable to the standard life, dental, and vision plans typically available from employers.

“This will make all fertility care, including IVF, far more affordable and accessible,” Trump said. “And by providing coverage at every step of the way, it will reduce the number of people who ultimately need to resort to IVF, because couples will be able to identify and address problems early.” 

“The result will be healthier pregnancies, healthier babies, and many more beautiful American children,” Trump continued. 

These fertility benefits will include both IVF and other fertility treatments “that address the root causes of infertility,” according to the Oct. 16 announcement. 

“There’s no deeper happiness and joy [than] raising children, and now millions of Americans struggling with infertility will have a new chance to share the greatest experience of them all,” Trump said. 

IVF is a fertility treatment opposed by the Catholic Church in which doctors fuse sperm and eggs in a laboratory to create human embryos and implant them in the mother’s womb. To maximize efficiency, doctors create excess human embryos and freeze them. Undesired embryos are routinely destroyed or used in scientific research.

Lila Rose, a devout Catholic and founder of the pro-life group Live Action, condemned the administration’s action, noting that “IVF kills more babies than abortion.”

“Millions of embryos are frozen, discarded, or destroyed,” Rose said in a post on X on Oct. 16.

“Only 7% of embryos created survive to birth,” she said. IVF is “not a solution to fertility struggles.”      

In response to Trump’s announcement, the March for Life celebrated the White House’s focus on children and fertility, while cautioning the administration to protect human life at all its stages, even as embryos. 

“March for Life appreciates that President Trump has heard and is responding to so many Americans who dream of becoming parents,” the March for Life said in a statement shared with CNA. “The desire for parenthood is natural and good. Children are a blessing. Life is a gift. The White House’s announcement today is rooted in these core truths.” 

The March for Life noted that “every human life is precious — no matter the circumstances” and urged policymakers to protect human life. 

“We continue to encourage any federal government policymaking surrounding IVF to prioritize protecting human life in its earliest stages and to fully align with basic standards of medical ethics,” the statement read. 

The group also welcomed “the administration’s commitment to making groundbreaking advancements in restorative reproductive medicine more accessible and available to American women.”  

Catholic institutes such as the Saint Paul VI Institute have pioneered a form of restorative reproductive medicine called NaProTechnology. “Naprotech” aims to discover and address the root cause of fertility issues via treatment and surgery if necessary. Some conditions that can affect fertility include endometriosis — which affects nearly 1 in 10 women — and polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), the leading cause of infertility.

“RRM aims to resolve rather than ignore underlying medical issues, increasing health and wellness while also restoring fertility, and responding to the beautiful desire for children while avoiding any collateral loss of human life,” March for Life stated.

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

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

unitedyam

null / Credit: Zolnierek / Shutterstock

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Judges question California’s ‘state interest’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ongoing scientific debate

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

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

Read More
California law allowing anonymous abortion pill prescriptions endangers women, experts say
Read More

California law allowing anonymous abortion pill prescriptions endangers women, experts say

unitedyam

Members of Students for Liberty protest chemical abortions at March for Life, Jan. 24, 2025. / Credit: Tyler Arnold/CNA

CNA Staff, Oct 6, 2025 / 08:00 am (CNA).

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill last week allowing doctors to anonymously prescribe abortion pills, a move ethicists and medical professionals say will endanger women.  

The law, designed to protect abortionists, allows them to prescribe the pill anonymously, protecting them from any professional, legal, or ethical oversight and from lawsuits filed by other states. 

California abortionists are already facing lawsuits for prescribing abortion drugs in states where they are illegal. In some cases, women maintain that they were coerced or deceived into taking the drugs by the father of their unborn child.

According to the new law, the doctor remains anonymous — even to the patient being prescribed the pill. His or her identity is only accessible via a subpoena within the state of California. 

Even the pharmacists dispensing the abortion drug may do so without including their names, or the names of the patient or prescriber, on the bottle. 

Abandoning women 

Dolores Meehan, a nurse practitioner and the executive director of Bella Primary Care in San Francisco, said the law is “codifying a type of back-alley abortion.”

“There’s no safety oversight at all from the perspective of the patient,” she told CNA. “It’s such a violation of patients’ rights.”

Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk, a senior ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Center, called the policy “patient abandonment.” 

Health care professionals “have a duty to provide careful medical supervision and oversight to patients who seek to obtain dangerous pharmaceuticals,” he told CNA.

“This oversight calls for significant patient scrutiny, medical testing, interviews, and in-person exams to assure that any prescribed medications will be appropriate for the specific medical situation of the patient,” Pacholczyk continued. “Such attentive oversight gets thrown to the wind when lawmakers and politicians like Gov. Newsom seek to pass unprincipled laws.”

Offering anonymous prescriptions, Pacholczyk said, “is a significant dereliction of duty.”

To do so implies “a willingness to look past important procedural requirements and duties, whether it’s health screening of the woman, obtaining her emergency contact information, or assuring follow-up care and support for her,” he continued.

The policy, Pacholczyk said, “works to corrode the very core of authentic medicine.”

Meehan expressed similar concerns about the anonymity of doctors prescribing abortion pills. 

She noted that licenses exist to ensure that “individuals are clear of any malfeasance or any malpractice.” 

“You can look up my license, and you can look up everything about me,” she said. “But if you don’t know my license, you don’t know who I am, you can’t.”

She noted that patients are turned into consumers but without any recourse should something go wrong. 

“You might as well go on Craigslist,” Meehan said. 

Not an informed choice

After he signed the bill, Newsom said that “California stands for a woman’s right to choose.” 

But Meehan noted that women don’t always know what they are choosing when they take the abortion pills. 

“It’s not about women’s rights, and it’s certainly not about women’s safety, and women’s health, and women’s choice,” Meehan said. “Because choice should always, always, always be accompanied by informed consent.”

“The gross misunderstanding about the abortion pill is that it’s somehow easy,” Meehan said. “But what so many women don’t understand is that they’re going to miscarry at home.” 

They’ll go through this “loss,” she noted, “by themselves.” 

“Women are really ill-prepared for what’s going to happen in their bodies. There’s the whole idea of women’s choice, but you’re not giving them informed choice,” she said. 

Pacholczyk shared similar concerns for women undergoing chemical abortions, saying that self-administered chemical abortions are a “harsh reality.”  

The abortion “often takes place in a bathroom, with psychological trauma experienced by a mother who may see her aborted baby floating in a toilet,” he said.  

Chemical abortions can sometimes lead to “serious medical complications — including sepsis, hemorrhage, or a need for repeated attempts to expel the child’s body” — for 1 in 10 women within 45 days of taking the abortion pill, he added. 

If a woman has an ectopic pregnancy, “administering the abortion pill could increase the risk of complications or delay urgently needed treatment,” he added.  

“Rather than treating women as anonymous entities and forcing them into greater isolation … mothers deserve the supportive medical attention and active care of their health care team,” he said. 

“Ideally, such attentive care should help them feel strengthened and empowered to carry their pregnancies to term rather than defaulting to a fear-driven and desperate attempt to end their child’s life,” he said.

Lower standard of care 

Jordan Butler, spokesperson for pro-life advocacy group Students for Life of America, called the policy “reckless.” 

“Eliminating requirements for identification and pregnancy verification creates dangerous loopholes that allow sexual abusers to evade accountability,” Butler said. 

Through the policy, Newsom and the abortion industry are “exploiting vulnerable women and children for profit,” she said. 

Pacholczyk and Meehan expressed similar concerns for the lower standard of care women — especially vulnerable women — would receive under the law. 

For women and girls facing human trafficking or coercion, protections “don’t exist,” Meehan said.  

“You could have your local pedophile, a sex offender, stockpiling them,” Meehan said.  

“Politicians, the media, and many in the medical profession have decided that abortion deserves an entirely different and lower standard than the rest of medicine,” Pacholczyk said. 

“We would never sanction such a loose approach with other potent pharmaceuticals like opioids or cancer medications,” Pacholczyk said.

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

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

unitedyam

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

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

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

Abortion declines even in states where it is still legal

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Virginia bishop speaks out against potential ‘abortion rights’ amendment

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Planned Parenthood closes its only 2 clinics in Louisiana

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

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

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

Louisiana authorities issue arrest warrant for California abortionist 

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

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

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

Read More
Pro-life group pledges million to Georgia and Michigan Senate races
Read More

Pro-life group pledges $9 million to Georgia and Michigan Senate races

unitedyam

null / Credit: Andy via Flickr (CC BY-NC 2.0)

CNA Staff, Sep 26, 2025 / 16:28 pm (CNA).

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

Pro-life group pledges $9 million to Georgia and Michigan Senate races

A pro-life advocacy group is launching a massive $9 million campaign in the Senate races of Georgia and Michigan.

Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America and its partner group, Women Speak Out PAC, are working to flip the U.S. Senate in Michigan, pouring $4.5 million into a field effort for the state’s open Senate seat.

Focused in Lansing, Detroit, and Grand Rapids, the pro-life groups aim to expand the U.S. Senate’s pro-life majority. In Michigan, four Planned Parenthoods have closed this year after Congress paused funding for abortion providers.

In Georgia, the same groups will pour $4.5 million into a field effort for Georgia’s U.S. Senate election. The campaign — aiming to defeat U.S. Sen. Jon Ossoff, a Georgia senator who has backed pro-abortion policies — will be focused in Savannah, Augusta, Columbus, and Chattanooga.

SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a Sept. 24 statement that the group aims to “stop the abortion lobby from clawing back $500 million in annual Medicaid dollars for their own political machine.” 

“No American should be forced to bankroll a brutal industry that kills over 1.1 million unborn children each year, harms women with substandard care, and funnels millions into partisan politics — especially when better, more accessible health care alternatives outnumber Planned Parenthood 15 to 1,” Dannenfelser said.

Pro-life groups celebrate as Google admits to political censorship 

Pro-life groups that have experienced censorship in the past are celebrating after Google admitted to political censorship under the Biden administration.

The tech giant admitted the censorship to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and said it was taking steps to open previously banned YouTube accounts.

Kelsey Pritchard, the political communications director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said companies like Google have a pattern of targeting pro-life advocacy groups.  

“We are not at all surprised by Google’s admissions of censorship,” Pritchard told CNA. 

“For years, tech giants have demonstrated a pattern of bias, actively undermining, suppressing, and censoring groups like Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, who share the pro-life message in a highly effective way.”

In a timeline on its website, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America detailed censorship and suppression of pro-life groups since 2015 by sites such as Facebook, Yelp, and Google. 

For instance, in 2022, Google allegedly shadow banned an online educational resource by Life Issues Institute. In 2021, Google banned Live Action and Heartbeat International’s abortion pill reversal advertisements, including Live Action’s Baby Olivia video, detailing the growth of an unborn child. 

SBA Pro-Life America also criticized the Biden administration for allegedly targeting pro-life activists with the law. 

“The Biden administration, too, weaponized federal might to target pro-life Americans and even put peaceful activists in jail,” Pritchard said. “The right to voice one’s convictions is a foundational American value and the pro-life movement will always fight back against censorship.”

Students for Life of America spokesperson Jordan Butler, meanwhile, told CNA that the pro-life group “is no stranger to the challenges of free speech in the digital age.”

“While we’ve been fortunate to avoid censorship on platforms like YouTube and Google, TikTok has proven to be a battleground: banning our content 180 times in just 24 hours,” Butler said. 

After outcry from pro-life advocates, Butler said the TikTok account, belonging to Lydia Taylor Davis, was restored. 

She sees this as “proof that when we stand together, we can push back.” 

“That’s why unity matters now more than ever in defending pro-life free speech across America,” Butler said.

“Abortion propaganda is everywhere online, saturating platforms from social media to search engines,” she continued. “Whether it’s digital censorship or campus pushback, we fight relentlessly to protect our voice and our values.”

‘Second-chance-at-life’ bill could protect unborn children across the nation

A group of U.S. congressmen is introducing a bill that could give unborn children a second chance at life even if a mother takes the first pill in the chemical abortion regimen.

U.S. Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, recently introduced the Second Chance at Life Act, which is designed to protect unborn children and mothers from the harms of abortion.

The act, co-sponsored by 16 representatives from 13 states, would establish federal informed consent requirements for abortion pills. This would require abortion providers to inform women seeking to terminate their pregnancies that a chemical abortion can be reversible after the first abortion pill is taken.

Pfluger said many women “are pressured into taking the abortion pill without being fully informed of all their options” and later “express deep regret as they come to terms with the loss of their unborn child.” 

“It is unacceptable that so many women are never told by their provider that the effects of the first pill can be reversible,” Pfluger said in a Sept. 18 statement.  

Pfluger said the legislation will “empower women to make fully informed choices at every stage of the process, protecting their right to know the full details” about the drugs. 

Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of America, supported the bill in a statement, noting that women are often pressured into abortion.  

“Many mothers regret their abortions and wish they had been told about abortion pill reversal before it was too late,” she said. “And too many women are exposed to the deadly pills by those who are coercing them.”

Senate investigates alleged abortion facilitation by Virginia school faculty 

U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, is investigating allegations that school officials in Virginia facilitated an abortion for a minor and attempted to do the same for another student without notifying their parents. 

Cassidy, who chairs the U.S. Senate Health Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, sent a letter to Superintendent Michelle Reid demanding answers after an investigative reporter broke the news that officials at Fairfax County’s Centreville High School reportedly pressured students to have abortions.

Missouri judge approves pro-life ballot measure, requires plainer language  

A Cole County Circuit judge approved a ballot measure that would protect minors and unborn children from transgender surgeries and abortion, respectively, if passed by Missouri voters.  

Because the ballot combines protections for minors against transgender surgeries and pro-life protections, activists challenged it in court. But Judge Daniel Green approved the combination in a Sept. 19 ruling, with the caveat that the ballot measure language must explicitly state that it would repeal a previous ballot measure.

The previous ballot measure, passed in 2024, created a right to abortion in the Missouri Constitution.

Wisconsin Planned Parenthood pauses abortions after federal funding cut 

Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin will stop scheduling abortions beginning Oct. 1 following federal funding cuts by the Trump administration.

Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin President and CEO Tanya Atkinson said the pause is meant to be temporary as the group deals with Medicaid funding cuts following the “Big Beautiful Bill.” The location will continue to operate and offer other services in the meantime.

The Trump administration temporarily paused any funding for abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood. At least 40 Planned Parenthoods are closing this year.

Read More
Former Philippines president Rodrigo Duterte charged with murder
Read More

Former Philippines president Rodrigo Duterte charged with murder

unitedyam

Former Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte gives a speech during a campaign rally at Southorn Stadium on March 9, 2025, in Hong Kong, China. / Credit: Anthony Kwan/Getty Images

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Sep 26, 2025 / 14:36 pm (CNA).

Here is a roundup of Catholic world news from the past week that you might have missed:

Former Philippines president Rodrigo Duterte charged with murder

After Filipino Catholic bishops welcomed the arrest of Rodrigo Duterte in March, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has now charged Duterte, the former president of the Philippines, with murder.

The three charges laid against Duterte, made public on Sept. 22, were dated back to July, according to the BBC. The first charge relates to Duterte’s involvement in the murder of 19 people in Davao City while he served as mayor from 2013 to 2016. The remaining charges relate to Duterte’s “war on drugs,” which saw the murder of 14 people across the country and the attempted murder of 45 others.

Caritas Philippines President Bishop Jose Colin Bagaforo of Kidapawan called Duterte’s detention a critical step toward justice, Vatican News reported in March. “For years Duterte has claimed that he is ready to face the consequences of his actions. Now is the time for him to prove it,” the bishop said. 

Syriac Catholic bishop discusses role of Christians in rebuilding Syria

In a meeting with the Levantine National Council, Syriac Catholic Bishop Hanna Jallouf discussed the role of Christians in public life as the country rebuilds after the fall of the Assad regime last winter.

According to a report from the Syriac Press, the meeting took place on Sept. 25 at the Monastery of St. Lazarus in Daramsuq (Damascus). “The meeting featured an in-depth discussion on the country’s current challenges, focusing on ways to enhance the role of Christians in public life while also addressing their concerns and fears amid ongoing instability,” the report said. 

Jallouf reportedly advocated for “citizenship and pluralism as the foundation for Syria’s stability” and encouraged the council to continue its efforts “to preserve the Church’s witness and unity” amid a period marked by fear for Christians and other religious minorities in the country.

Christians in India suffer harassment, arrests at hands of Hindu groups 

Police in the north Indian state of Uttar Pradesh arrested 14 Christians on Sept. 19 for allegedly violating the state’s stringent anti-conversion law and the national criminal code, according to UCA News.

The report also noted that a group of 19 girls accompanied by a Catholic nun and two staff members of a nongovernmental organization were also arrested Sept. 19 in Jharkhand, which borders Uttar Pradesh from the south, for violating the conversion law as well. The group was released the following day. According to Church sources cited in the report, the arrests were made after “allegations by some right-wing Hindu groups as the girls were traveling to attend a training program, and the nuns came to the railway station to welcome them.” 

Chair of Philippines Bishops’ Conference speaks out against corruption 

Bishop Broderick Pabillo of Taytay in Palawan, Philippines, chair of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines Office on Stewardship, has published a pastoral letter condemning the normalization of corruption in the country. 

“We must not accept corruption as the norm — it is stealing the people’s taxes,” he said in the letter, according to local reports, pointing out that government funds have been redirected away from critical services such as hospitals, clean water initiatives, safe roads, and electricity for political reasons. “If we want to reduce corruption, we must stop voting for relatives in power,” the bishop added. 

Chaldean Catholics return to ancestral homeland in Turkey after nearly half a century

A Chaldean Catholic community from the southeast village of Köreli in the Şirnak Silopi district of Turkey returned to their ancestral homeland after nearly half a century, according to a local report on Sept. 25.

About 150 pilgrims, who traveled from across Turkey and abroad, participated in the 10-day visit and celebrated a “deeply symbolic Mass and offered prayers at the village cemetery.”

According to the report, Turkey’s Chaldean Catholic Archbishop Sabri Anar expressed gratitude to the government and for those who welcomed the group. “Our aim is to reconcile those who left this land with their past and show them that the region is safe,” he noted. “Each visit fills us with happiness. In the eyes of our people, we can see the longing for homeland, for soil, and for history.”

Australian bishop returned to public ministry after abuse allegation dismissed

Bishop Richard Umbers of the Archdiocese of Sydney has been reinstated to public ministry after an independent investigation determined abuse allegations lodged against him were “not sustained,” according to an internal email cited in a Sept. 24 report by the Pillar.

“The report from the independent investigator highlighted information given by the complainant that was inconsistent with other evidence obtained and therefore, the investigator could not be satisfied that the alleged conduct occurred,” the email by archdiocesan vicar general Father Samuel Lynch said. 

The claim of historical abuse against the Opus Dei bishop had been made in early July, after which he stepped down in accordance with archdiocesan protocol. 

Bangladesh Catholics fear Muslim extremist persecution as elections loom

The Catholic community in Bangladesh is “living in fear” of persecution as Islamic fundamentalism is on the rise and elections loom in the coming February, according to a Sept. 24 Crux report.

“We are afraid of the upcoming elections. Because, before and after the elections, we have been subjected to many injustices and this time there is a greater possibility of it. So, we are constantly praying to God to protect us,” Welcome Lamba, a leader of the Khasi Indigenous village of Pratappur Punjee, told Crux, which noted that there were over 1,000 cases of human rights violations against religious minorities in the country from 2023 to 2024. 

Australia donates vehicles to Catholic Church Health Services in Papua New Guinea 

After government officials in Papua New Guinea (PNG) announced in June a nationwide HIV emergence, the Australian government has now donated “a fleet of vehicles” to the Catholic Church Health Services in PNG to help aid efforts to expand access to treatment for HIV, according to a local report on Sept. 25. 

“The vehicles will support outreach services that include community-based HIV testing, prevention of mother-to-child transmission, antiretroviral therapy adherence, and referrals to other clinics and social services,” the report stated.

Angolan bishop speaks out against deforestation, poaching

Bishop Martín Lasarte Topolansky in Lwena, Angola, spoke out this week against escalating environmental destruction in eastern Angola, particularly in border areas with Zambia, where illegal logging and poaching are severely impacting the population, ACI Africa, CNA’s news partner in Africa, reported Thursday.

“It is with a heavy heart that I see the felling of precious trees and the disappearance of animals that are part of our environmental heritage. We are witnessing a true plunder of what belongs to the Angolan people,” Lasarte told ACI Africa, while recalling a recent pastoral visit to communities in Eastern Moxico.

The bishop also noted “illegal exploitation of our forests by foreign citizens crossing our border,” likely by Zambians taking advantage of weak local enforcement. He further called on the Angolan government to secure the country’s eastern border and establish stricter environmental laws. “This land is a gift from God, and we will be accountable for how we treat it,” he said.

Read More
Abortion pill complications are underreported, report finds  
Read More

Abortion pill complications are underreported, report finds  

unitedyam

Credit: Ivanko80/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Sep 24, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA).

Abortion pill complications go underreported in abortion industry studies and mainstream media, according to a recent report by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC).

Abortion industry studies claim that serious complications are incredibly rare — occurring in less than half a percent of cases, according to the report “Missed, Misclassified, and Minimized: Why Abortion Pill Complications Are Underreported.”

But a study last year found that more than 1 in 10 women who took the abortion pill experienced serious complications such as hemorrhaging, infection, failed abortions, and surgical follow-up.

The author of the report, Randall O’Bannon, set out to investigate the discrepancy.

O’Bannon, director of education and research for the National Right to Life, found several factors contributing to the discrepancies. For one, he found that abortion providers often encourage women to conceal negative side effects and tell doctors they are symptoms of a miscarriage. O’Bannon also observed what he called a “contemptible lack of curiosity in the media” toward stories of women hurt by abortion drugs. Finally, serious complications are often categorized as “minor,” O’Bannon found.

O’Bannon said the “flawed or slanted industry studies” are “not good enough.”

“The public — and policymakers — deserve accurate, transparent reporting on the dangers of chemical abortion,” he said in a statement.

Dr. Ingrid Skop, vice president and director of medical affairs for Charlotte Lozier Institute and a board-certified OB-GYN, said she has encountered these medical complications in her own career as a medical provider.

“I have cared for dozens of women presenting to the ER with abortion drug complications, and they are told by abortion advocates there’s no need to report the use of abortion drugs,” she told CNA.

“When I see a woman in the ER with continued pain and bleeding sometimes weeks or even months after taking abortion drugs, she usually has retained pregnancy tissue and/or the dead baby, which the drugs have failed to expel,” Skop continued. “An unaware ER doctor is likely to give her more of the drugs that already failed rather than expediting the surgical aspiration she needs.”

“As a researcher and practicing OB-GYN, I can attest that the lived experience for many women reflects the data documented in this report,” Skop said.

“So where are all the women some of these later reports and studies say have been injured and abused by these drugs and their prescribers?” O’Bannon asked. “Once again, we see that they have been silenced and minimized, told their pain and blood and trauma are ‘minor complications’ that somehow just don’t rise to the level worthy of being noticed. But they suffer and bleed just the same.”

Looking at the numbers  

Michael New, assistant professor of practice at the Busch School of Business for The Catholic University of America, noted that “the FDA’s own data shows that there are a number of health risks involved with chemical abortions.”

“Since the FDA approved the chemical abortion pill in 2000, the FDA’s own data indicates that there have been 32 deaths, 4,218 adverse events, 1,049 hospitalizations, 604 cases of blood loss requiring a transfusion, 418 infections, and 75 severe infections,” New, a senior associate scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, told CNA. 

The FDA figures “are underreported” due to a change in the reporting requirements implemented nearly a decade ago, according to New.

“In 2016, the FDA quit requiring that health care professionals report complications from chemical abortion drugs,” New said. “Since 2016, the reporting of complications has been voluntary.” 

In 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA removed the requirement for women to have an in-person medical exam before being prescribed chemical abortion drugs.

Since then, “the number of complications has almost certainly increased,” New said.

Without a medical exam, abortion providers may unwittingly provide abortion drugs to women whose pregnancies are further along than is recommended for chemical abortions, as well as women who have ectopic pregnancies (a life-threatening condition where the embryo implants outside the uterus). 

Trump administration continues to implement ‘unwise policy’

“The Biden administration FDA and thus far the Trump administration FDA have continued with this unwise policy,” New said. 

Chemical abortions are sometimes falsely advertised as “safer than Tylenol.” But a chemical abortion is far less safe than even a surgical abortion, Skop noted. 

“Complications occur at least four times as frequently following drug-induced abortions compared to surgical abortions, causing at least 1 in 15 women to require emergency care when the drugs are used as the FDA recommends,” Skop said. “Even more women suffer when they are taken at advanced gestational ages.” 

“The abortion pill is being sold as safe, but independent data tell another story,” Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life, said in a statement. “Women are being harmed, and the dangers are being ignored or hidden.” 

“Abortion industry spin makes mifepristone abortions sound easy, but the truth is each abortion takes the life of a living preborn child and places the woman in danger,” Tobias said.

How can policymakers respond?

New noted that public officials could take several steps “to protect mothers and children” from these dangers, including requiring that “medical professionals report complications that arise from chemical abortions.” 

In addition, the FDA “could require that women obtaining chemical abortions first have an in-person medical exam,” a change that New said the Trump administration could make “right away.” 

“Thus far, it is disappointing that the Trump administration has not prioritized keeping women safe from unregulated chemical abortion drugs,” New said. 

Skop added that “policymakers need better abortion data.” 

“Extensive deficiencies affect abortion data collection in the U.S., including a lack of anonymized national reporting requirements,” Skop said. 

“Women also need to know the true risk of abortion and potential complications, which are both physical and mental,” she continued. 

Skop noted that “the majority of women with a history of abortion would have preferred to give birth if they had the necessary support.” 

“Women also should know there are 2,750 pregnancy resource centers that want to walk alongside women facing an unintended pregnancy to provide any support they need,” Skop said. 

Nonprofit organizations across the country exist to provide pregnant women and mothers with support — from baby clothes to ultrasounds to parenting classes. 

“The abortion industry’s goal is to promote all-trimester abortion on demand,” Skop noted. “And lawmakers, the public, and most importantly, women considering abortion, must understand abortion advocates will mislead them to achieve that goal.”

Read More
Anti-assisted-suicide group says suicide laws expanding throughout U.S. in 2025
Read More

Anti-assisted-suicide group says suicide laws expanding throughout U.S. in 2025

unitedyam

null / Credit: nito/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Sep 19, 2025 / 14:31 pm (CNA).

This week the Patients Rights Action Fund, which works to “end the dangerous and discriminatory public policy of assisted suicide,” provided an update on current assisted suicide legislation in the United States, revealing the deadly practice’s ongoing expansion throughout the country.

In a Sept. 18 webinar, group coalitions director Jessica Rodgers explained that most states that allow assisted suicide follow the “Oregon model,” based on Oregan’s assisted suicide criteria. 

The model requires “the patient to be 18 years of age or older, have a terminal illness with six months or less to live, make two or more separate requests with a 15-day waiting period in between, and have two witnesses, which can include heirs to the estate or friends of heirs,” Rodgers said. 

“The drugs must be self-administered and all states do require the falsification of the death certificate,” Rodgers said, meaning the states list the underlying condition that qualifies the patient as the cause of death rather than the prescribed drug that ends his or her life.

States attempting expansions to assisted suicide laws

In 2025, new legislation was proposed in a number of states where assisted suicide is legal to advance its polices and limit some of the “safeguards” in place.

A New Jersey bill was proposed that would remove the 15-day waiting period and the second request if the prescriber thinks death will occur within the time period. The bill is still in play and has not been passed yet. 

In Maine, a 15-day waiting period was reduced to seven days in cases when it is “in the best interests of the patient” according to the judgment of the prescriber. The legislation was passed and signed by the governor after the original version was amended that would have allowed the whole waiting period to be waived.

A Delaware bill passed that allows for advanced practice nurses to prescribe the medication that kills the patients. The bill has no requirements for an in-person exam or a mental health evaluation. 

California proposed a major change that reduced the 15-day waiting period for assisted suicide to only 48 hours. The bill also removes the sunset date, which will keep the End of Life Option Act from expiring. The bill passed last week and is awaiting a signature by the governor.

Some states proposed expansions, but the legislation did not advance. In Washington, D.C., there was a public hearing on a bill that would remove the waiting period in certain cases, but no action was taken.

An Oregon bill was also not advanced that proposed nurse practitioners and physician assistants could prescribe to patients seeking assisted suicide. It also pushed for the waiting period to be reduced from 15 days to 48 hours and would waive the period completely if death is “expected imminently.”

Proposed legislation to legalize assisted suicide 

Assisted suicide is legal in 10 states and D.C., but a number of other states have active legislation to legalize it. 

In New York a bill to legalize assisted suicide was approved and is awaiting signature by the governor, which she must sign by the end of the year. The bill does not require the patient to be a resident of the state, has no waiting period, and does not require an in-person exam or a mental health evaluation.

In Rhode Island assisting a suicide is a felony, but there is proposed legislation to legalize assisted suicide that would require an in-person evaluation. The bill requires a 15-day waiting period between requests and an additional 48-hour waiting period that begins after the patient submits his or her signed request for the medication. 

Nevada does not authorize assisted suicide, but legislation pushing for it proposed advanced practice nurses to be allowed to prescribe the drugs, no in-person exam requirement, only one witness necessarily, and no requirement for the patient to be a resident of the state. 

The Nevada legislation does detail that the prescribed drugs would be the cause of death on the certificate rather than the underlying condition.

Legislation in Maryland would not require a mental health evaluation and has a broad meaning for “terminal illness” that can include treatable conditions. The bill has provisions that allow a patient to communicate through someone else “familiar with the individual’s manner of communicating.” 

Proposed legislation in Massachusetts also has a broad definition for “terminal illness” that can include treatable conditions. There was a public hearing in Massachusetts in the state Joint Public Health Committee, which then moved the bill to a second committee on the state House side where it is still active. 

In New Hampshire, a bill is pushing for no residency requirement, no in-person examination requirement, a broad “terminal illness” definition, and no mental health evaluation. The legislation also proposed a 48-hour waiting period and would allow for advanced practice nurses and physician assistants to prescribe the drugs. 

A Tennessee House bill pushing the legalization of assisted suicide primarily follows the Oregon model. It does have a broad meaning for “terminal illness” that can include treatable conditions. On March 4, the first committee hearing was held on the matter, but it was rejected.

In Illinois, a 2025 bill to legalize assisted suicide in the state stalled and will cross over to the 2026 session. The bill had a five-day waiting period, no requirement for mental health evaluation, and broad terminal diagnosis language.

As legislation continues to be proposed and advances in assisted suicide expand, Patients Rights Action Fund highlighted the lack of mental health evaluations across states and noted that waiting periods are being quickly reduced after the initial passing of legislation.

“Ultimately, assisted suicide laws are inherently discriminatory,” Rodgers said on Sept. 18. 

“They take a segment of our neighbors and say: ‘You get a lower standard of care than everybody else,’” she said. “The patients that qualify for assisted suicide are already inherently in a more vulnerable state because of their diagnosis and because of the financial costs that they’re facing with health care and the cost of treatment.”

Read More