freedom

Texas voters to decide on parental rights amendment in November #Catholic Texas state capitol. / Credit: Inspired By Maps/Shutterstock Houston, Texas, Oct 29, 2025 / 07:00 am (CNA). Texas voters will head to the polls next week to consider Proposition 15, the Parental Rights Amendment, a constitutional amendment aimed at enshrining parents’ rights in the state constitution.The measure, if approved, would add language to the Texas Constitution affirming that parents have the right “to exercise care, custody, and control of the parent’s child, including the right to make decisions concerning the child’s upbringing” and the responsibility “to nurture and protect the parent’s child.” Texas already ranks among 26 states with a Parents’ Bill of Rights enshrined in state law. That existing statute grants parents a right to “full information” concerning their child at school as well as access to their child’s student records, copies of state assessments, and teaching materials, among other provisions.The Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops told CNA it supports the “proposed amendment to recognize the natural right of parents to direct their children’s upbringing.”Other supporters include the Baptist General Convention of Texas Christian Life Commission, Family Freedom Project, Texans for Vaccine Choice, Texas Eagle Forum, Texas Home School Coalition, Texas Public Policy Foundation, and Texas Right to Life PAC.Marcella Burke, a Houston attorney, told CNA that “it’s good to live in a state where an amendment like this is on the table. Parents matter, their kids matter, and families should be protected against government interference. That’s exactly what this amendment seeks to do: keep governments from interfering with beneficial family growth and child development.”“While these rights to nurture and protect children are currently safeguarded thanks to existing Supreme Court case law, there is no federal constitutional amendment protecting these rights,” Burke continued.Opposition to the proposition has come from both Democratic as well as conservative advocacy groups.According to the True Texas Project, a conservative group of former Tea Party supporters, the language of the amendment is too vague. In addition, the group argues that “Prop 15 would simply declare that parents have the inherent right to make decisions for their children. We should not have to put this into the state constitution! God has already ordained that parents are to be responsible for their children, and government has no place in family decisions, except in the case of child abuse and neglect.”The group says that including the proposed language in the state constitution “equates to acknowledgement that the state has conferred this right. And we know that what the state can give, the state can take away.”Burke said, however, that “an amendment like this will make governments think twice and carefully consider any actions affecting child-rearing. Keep in mind that no rights are absolute, so in this context, parents don’t have the right to abuse their kids — and that’s the sort of exception the amendment reads in.”Katy Faust, founder of children’s advocacy group Them Before Us, told CNA parental rights are the “flipside of genuine child rights.”
Read More

Texas voters to decide on parental rights amendment in November #Catholic Texas state capitol. / Credit: Inspired By Maps/Shutterstock Houston, Texas, Oct 29, 2025 / 07:00 am (CNA). Texas voters will head to the polls next week to consider Proposition 15, the Parental Rights Amendment, a constitutional amendment aimed at enshrining parents’ rights in the state constitution.The measure, if approved, would add language to the Texas Constitution affirming that parents have the right “to exercise care, custody, and control of the parent’s child, including the right to make decisions concerning the child’s upbringing” and the responsibility “to nurture and protect the parent’s child.” Texas already ranks among 26 states with a Parents’ Bill of Rights enshrined in state law. That existing statute grants parents a right to “full information” concerning their child at school as well as access to their child’s student records, copies of state assessments, and teaching materials, among other provisions.The Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops told CNA it supports the “proposed amendment to recognize the natural right of parents to direct their children’s upbringing.”Other supporters include the Baptist General Convention of Texas Christian Life Commission, Family Freedom Project, Texans for Vaccine Choice, Texas Eagle Forum, Texas Home School Coalition, Texas Public Policy Foundation, and Texas Right to Life PAC.Marcella Burke, a Houston attorney, told CNA that “it’s good to live in a state where an amendment like this is on the table. Parents matter, their kids matter, and families should be protected against government interference. That’s exactly what this amendment seeks to do: keep governments from interfering with beneficial family growth and child development.”“While these rights to nurture and protect children are currently safeguarded thanks to existing Supreme Court case law, there is no federal constitutional amendment protecting these rights,” Burke continued.Opposition to the proposition has come from both Democratic as well as conservative advocacy groups.According to the True Texas Project, a conservative group of former Tea Party supporters, the language of the amendment is too vague. In addition, the group argues that “Prop 15 would simply declare that parents have the inherent right to make decisions for their children. We should not have to put this into the state constitution! God has already ordained that parents are to be responsible for their children, and government has no place in family decisions, except in the case of child abuse and neglect.”The group says that including the proposed language in the state constitution “equates to acknowledgement that the state has conferred this right. And we know that what the state can give, the state can take away.”Burke said, however, that “an amendment like this will make governments think twice and carefully consider any actions affecting child-rearing. Keep in mind that no rights are absolute, so in this context, parents don’t have the right to abuse their kids — and that’s the sort of exception the amendment reads in.”Katy Faust, founder of children’s advocacy group Them Before Us, told CNA parental rights are the “flipside of genuine child rights.”

unitedyam

Texas state capitol. / Credit: Inspired By Maps/Shutterstock

Houston, Texas, Oct 29, 2025 / 07:00 am (CNA).

Texas voters will head to the polls next week to consider Proposition 15, the Parental Rights Amendment, a constitutional amendment aimed at enshrining parents’ rights in the state constitution.

The measure, if approved, would add language to the Texas Constitution affirming that parents have the right “to exercise care, custody, and control of the parent’s child, including the right to make decisions concerning the child’s upbringing” and the responsibility “to nurture and protect the parent’s child.” 

Texas already ranks among 26 states with a Parents’ Bill of Rights enshrined in state law. That existing statute grants parents a right to “full information” concerning their child at school as well as access to their child’s student records, copies of state assessments, and teaching materials, among other provisions.

The Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops told CNA it supports the “proposed amendment to recognize the natural right of parents to direct their children’s upbringing.”

Other supporters include the Baptist General Convention of Texas Christian Life Commission, Family Freedom Project, Texans for Vaccine Choice, Texas Eagle Forum, Texas Home School Coalition, Texas Public Policy Foundation, and Texas Right to Life PAC.

Marcella Burke, a Houston attorney, told CNA that “it’s good to live in a state where an amendment like this is on the table. Parents matter, their kids matter, and families should be protected against government interference. That’s exactly what this amendment seeks to do: keep governments from interfering with beneficial family growth and child development.”

“While these rights to nurture and protect children are currently safeguarded thanks to existing Supreme Court case law, there is no federal constitutional amendment protecting these rights,” Burke continued.

Opposition to the proposition has come from both Democratic as well as conservative advocacy groups.

According to the True Texas Project, a conservative group of former Tea Party supporters, the language of the amendment is too vague. In addition, the group argues that “Prop 15 would simply declare that parents have the inherent right to make decisions for their children. We should not have to put this into the state constitution! God has already ordained that parents are to be responsible for their children, and government has no place in family decisions, except in the case of child abuse and neglect.”

The group says that including the proposed language in the state constitution “equates to acknowledgement that the state has conferred this right. And we know that what the state can give, the state can take away.”

Burke said, however, that “an amendment like this will make governments think twice and carefully consider any actions affecting child-rearing. Keep in mind that no rights are absolute, so in this context, parents don’t have the right to abuse their kids — and that’s the sort of exception the amendment reads in.”

Katy Faust, founder of children’s advocacy group Them Before Us, told CNA parental rights are the “flipside of genuine child rights.”

Read More
Author of religious freedom report weighs in on Cardinal Parolin’s Nigeria comments #Catholic Marta Petrosillo, editor-in-chief of the Aid to the Church in Need (ACN) Religious Freedom Report. / Credit: Gael Kerbaol/Secours Catholique Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 24, 2025 / 09:14 am (CNA). The author of Aid to the Church in Need’s 2025 Religious Freedom Report, Marta Petrosillo, is coming to Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin’s defense after remarks he made regarding persecution of Nigerian Christians prompted pushback.Parolin sparked pushback after stating at a press conference on Tuesday that ongoing violence and unrest in Nigeria is a “social conflict” rather than a religious one. He told Vatican reporters during the presser for Aid to the Church in Need’s 2025 Religious Freedom Report release event: “I think they’ve already said, and some Nigerians have already said, that it’s not a religious conflict but rather a social conflict, for example, between herders and farmers.”“Let’s keep in mind that many Muslims who come to Nigeria are victims of this intolerance,” he continued.” So, these extremist groups, these groups that make no distinctions to advance their goals, their objectives, use violence against anyone they perceive as an opponent.” The remarks prompted immediate pushback, including from Sean Nelson of Alliance Defending Freedom International, who called them “particularly shocking.” Nina Shea of the Hudson Institute further characterized them as “repeating the Nigerian government’s talking points that obfuscate and downplay the persecution of the Catholic faithful and other Christians in Nigeria’s Middle Belt,” in comments to the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner. As author of the report, Petrosillo weighed in on the controversy in an Oct. 23 interview on EWTN’s “The World Over with Raymond Arroyo,” telling Arroyo: “Cardinal Parolin didn’t say [the conflict was solely between farmers and herders] in his speech in our conference. His speech was really strong, underlining the importance of religious freedom.” “I know that Cardinal Parolin is one of the most important people on religious freedom,” she continued. “He has a huge knowledge on this.” Regarding the controversy that has ensued over Parolin’s comments, Petrosillo said: “I can only suppose that … it was referring to the complex situation there.” She added: “I think that this topic [is] too complex and too elaborate, just for one journalist to take one sentence outside a conference in a very rushed way. So I would not consider that as a statement from his eminence.”Petrosillo further pushed back against claims that the focus of the ACN report was to highlight Christian persecution alone, stating: “No, the focus of our report is not that Christians are the only group affected.” “In our report, we [documented] a violation of religious freedom against all the religious groups,” she told Arroyo. “Of course, in the case of Nigeria, there are specific anti-Christian incidents, but we are not saying that only Christians are targeted in Nigeria, because as I also said before, in some cases, we have also many Muslims that refuse extremist ideology ... being killed.”
Read More

Author of religious freedom report weighs in on Cardinal Parolin’s Nigeria comments #Catholic Marta Petrosillo, editor-in-chief of the Aid to the Church in Need (ACN) Religious Freedom Report. / Credit: Gael Kerbaol/Secours Catholique Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 24, 2025 / 09:14 am (CNA). The author of Aid to the Church in Need’s 2025 Religious Freedom Report, Marta Petrosillo, is coming to Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin’s defense after remarks he made regarding persecution of Nigerian Christians prompted pushback.Parolin sparked pushback after stating at a press conference on Tuesday that ongoing violence and unrest in Nigeria is a “social conflict” rather than a religious one. He told Vatican reporters during the presser for Aid to the Church in Need’s 2025 Religious Freedom Report release event: “I think they’ve already said, and some Nigerians have already said, that it’s not a religious conflict but rather a social conflict, for example, between herders and farmers.”“Let’s keep in mind that many Muslims who come to Nigeria are victims of this intolerance,” he continued.” So, these extremist groups, these groups that make no distinctions to advance their goals, their objectives, use violence against anyone they perceive as an opponent.” The remarks prompted immediate pushback, including from Sean Nelson of Alliance Defending Freedom International, who called them “particularly shocking.” Nina Shea of the Hudson Institute further characterized them as “repeating the Nigerian government’s talking points that obfuscate and downplay the persecution of the Catholic faithful and other Christians in Nigeria’s Middle Belt,” in comments to the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner. As author of the report, Petrosillo weighed in on the controversy in an Oct. 23 interview on EWTN’s “The World Over with Raymond Arroyo,” telling Arroyo: “Cardinal Parolin didn’t say [the conflict was solely between farmers and herders] in his speech in our conference. His speech was really strong, underlining the importance of religious freedom.” “I know that Cardinal Parolin is one of the most important people on religious freedom,” she continued. “He has a huge knowledge on this.” Regarding the controversy that has ensued over Parolin’s comments, Petrosillo said: “I can only suppose that … it was referring to the complex situation there.” She added: “I think that this topic [is] too complex and too elaborate, just for one journalist to take one sentence outside a conference in a very rushed way. So I would not consider that as a statement from his eminence.”Petrosillo further pushed back against claims that the focus of the ACN report was to highlight Christian persecution alone, stating: “No, the focus of our report is not that Christians are the only group affected.” “In our report, we [documented] a violation of religious freedom against all the religious groups,” she told Arroyo. “Of course, in the case of Nigeria, there are specific anti-Christian incidents, but we are not saying that only Christians are targeted in Nigeria, because as I also said before, in some cases, we have also many Muslims that refuse extremist ideology … being killed.”

unitedyam

Marta Petrosillo, editor-in-chief of the Aid to the Church in Need (ACN) Religious Freedom Report. / Credit: Gael Kerbaol/Secours Catholique

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 24, 2025 / 09:14 am (CNA).

The author of Aid to the Church in Need’s 2025 Religious Freedom Report, Marta Petrosillo, is coming to Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin’s defense after remarks he made regarding persecution of Nigerian Christians prompted pushback.

Parolin sparked pushback after stating at a press conference on Tuesday that ongoing violence and unrest in Nigeria is a “social conflict” rather than a religious one. He told Vatican reporters during the presser for Aid to the Church in Need’s 2025 Religious Freedom Report release event: “I think they’ve already said, and some Nigerians have already said, that it’s not a religious conflict but rather a social conflict, for example, between herders and farmers.”

“Let’s keep in mind that many Muslims who come to Nigeria are victims of this intolerance,” he continued.” So, these extremist groups, these groups that make no distinctions to advance their goals, their objectives, use violence against anyone they perceive as an opponent.” 

The remarks prompted immediate pushback, including from Sean Nelson of Alliance Defending Freedom International, who called them “particularly shocking.” Nina Shea of the Hudson Institute further characterized them as “repeating the Nigerian government’s talking points that obfuscate and downplay the persecution of the Catholic faithful and other Christians in Nigeria’s Middle Belt,” in comments to the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner. 

As author of the report, Petrosillo weighed in on the controversy in an Oct. 23 interview on EWTN’s “The World Over with Raymond Arroyo,” telling Arroyo: “Cardinal Parolin didn’t say [the conflict was solely between farmers and herders] in his speech in our conference. His speech was really strong, underlining the importance of religious freedom.” 

“I know that Cardinal Parolin is one of the most important people on religious freedom,” she continued. “He has a huge knowledge on this.” 

Regarding the controversy that has ensued over Parolin’s comments, Petrosillo said: “I can only suppose that … it was referring to the complex situation there.”

She added: “I think that this topic [is] too complex and too elaborate, just for one journalist to take one sentence outside a conference in a very rushed way. So I would not consider that as a statement from his eminence.”

Petrosillo further pushed back against claims that the focus of the ACN report was to highlight Christian persecution alone, stating: “No, the focus of our report is not that Christians are the only group affected.” 

“In our report, we [documented] a violation of religious freedom against all the religious groups,” she told Arroyo. “Of course, in the case of Nigeria, there are specific anti-Christian incidents, but we are not saying that only Christians are targeted in Nigeria, because as I also said before, in some cases, we have also many Muslims that refuse extremist ideology … being killed.”

Read More
Catholic college graduates leading in purpose, belonging, financial stability, report says #Catholic null / Credit: RasyidArt/Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 22, 2025 / 10:07 am (CNA). Here’s a roundup of the latest Catholic education news in the United States:Catholic college graduates leading in purpose, belonging, financial stability, report saysGraduates of Catholic colleges and universities are outperforming other students in purpose and belonging and are reporting higher levels of mental health and financial stability, a report has found. Students from Catholic institutions of higher education are 7% more likely to view their careers as meaningful, 14% more likely to report a strong sense of belonging, and 17% more likely to say they are satisfied with their mental health, according to this year’s Holistic Impact Report.The annual report is published by the Center for Catholic Studies at St. Mary’s University (San Antonio) in partnership with YouGov. The report also found that Catholic university graduates are more than 50% more likely to say their education encouraged them to engage in faith-based conversations and 12% more likely to say their courses promoted dialogue across differing perspectives. “Higher education has been disrupted by political battles and financial pressures,” stated Jason King, the Beirne director and chair of the Center for Catholic Studies at St. Mary’s University. But “Catholic higher education does not appear to be caught in those tides,” he said.“With two years of data, we can see that it continues to form graduates for meaningful lives, community engagement, and ethical decision-making. And, because of this focus, it also supports graduates’ mental, financial, and social well-being.”Los Angeles-area school aims to ‘raise’ 1 million prayers by All Saints’ Day A Catholic school in California is leading an initiative to “raise” 1 million prayers by All Saints’ Day. “This special initiative began on the eve of the canonizations of St. Carlo Acutis and St. Pier Giorgio Frassati, two modern witnesses who remind us that holiness is possible for everyone, especially the young,” St. Joseph School explained in a Facebook post on Oct. 3.“Inspired by their example, our students, families, and faculty have already prayed more than 150,000 prayers… and we’re just getting started!” the school said.“During this month of the holy rosary,” the school continued, “we are dedicating ourselves to praying the rosary together each day as a school community. Families are also recording their prayers at home; rosaries, Masses, traditional devotions, and personal prayers spoken from the heart.” Three schools — Epiphany Catholic School in South El Monte, St. Anthony School in San Gabriel, and Santa Clara Elementary School in Oxnard — have also joined the initiative, according to the school.San Antonio Catholic schools to start accepting education saving accounts The Archdiocese of San Antonio says its Catholic schools will now officially accept tuition from the Texas education savings account (ESA) program. “Catholic schools in the Archdiocese of San Antonio are strongly promoting and participating in the Texas Education Freedom Accounts (TEFA) program, which provides funds for tuition at Catholic schools,” the archdiocese said in a statement to local media.Under the program, students at Catholic schools will be able to receive ,000 to cover tuition costs that will be placed in a savings account, providing increased flexibility to parents. Inga Cotton, the founder and executive director of the San Antonio-based School Discovery Network, told media: “Catholic schools are some of the most affordable private schools in our region.” She added that for “so many of them, the annual tuition is already below what the ESA will cover. It makes it more affordable for families.”“Across the archdiocese, schools are preparing to welcome many new families through the launch of this effort,” the archdiocese said.The legislation “was the result of hard work from many people through the years, who have been consistently advocating to give parents a true choice in education for their children.”Pennsylvania diocese: State tax policy allows major break for donating to Catholic schoolsThe Diocese of Pittsburgh is encouraging residents to take advantage of the state’s tax policy, which grants major tax breaks to those who donate to Catholic schools. “The Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh is making it easier than ever for individuals and businesses to transform their Pennsylvania state tax dollars into tuition assistance for Catholic school students, at no additional cost to them,” the diocese said in a statement this month. “When you participate, you’re transforming lives,” Pittsburgh Bishop Mark Eckman said. “Every dollar given through this program helps open doors to a Catholic education that forms hearts, minds, and futures. It’s one of the simplest and most powerful ways to make a lasting difference for our children and our Church.”According to the diocese, the state’s Educational Improvement Tax Credit programs enable participants to receive a 90% state tax credit when they contribute to the diocese’s approved scholarship fund. The diocese has launched an online resource that offers step-by-step instructions on how to participate.
Read More

Catholic college graduates leading in purpose, belonging, financial stability, report says #Catholic null / Credit: RasyidArt/Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 22, 2025 / 10:07 am (CNA). Here’s a roundup of the latest Catholic education news in the United States:Catholic college graduates leading in purpose, belonging, financial stability, report saysGraduates of Catholic colleges and universities are outperforming other students in purpose and belonging and are reporting higher levels of mental health and financial stability, a report has found. Students from Catholic institutions of higher education are 7% more likely to view their careers as meaningful, 14% more likely to report a strong sense of belonging, and 17% more likely to say they are satisfied with their mental health, according to this year’s Holistic Impact Report.The annual report is published by the Center for Catholic Studies at St. Mary’s University (San Antonio) in partnership with YouGov. The report also found that Catholic university graduates are more than 50% more likely to say their education encouraged them to engage in faith-based conversations and 12% more likely to say their courses promoted dialogue across differing perspectives. “Higher education has been disrupted by political battles and financial pressures,” stated Jason King, the Beirne director and chair of the Center for Catholic Studies at St. Mary’s University. But “Catholic higher education does not appear to be caught in those tides,” he said.“With two years of data, we can see that it continues to form graduates for meaningful lives, community engagement, and ethical decision-making. And, because of this focus, it also supports graduates’ mental, financial, and social well-being.”Los Angeles-area school aims to ‘raise’ 1 million prayers by All Saints’ Day A Catholic school in California is leading an initiative to “raise” 1 million prayers by All Saints’ Day. “This special initiative began on the eve of the canonizations of St. Carlo Acutis and St. Pier Giorgio Frassati, two modern witnesses who remind us that holiness is possible for everyone, especially the young,” St. Joseph School explained in a Facebook post on Oct. 3.“Inspired by their example, our students, families, and faculty have already prayed more than 150,000 prayers… and we’re just getting started!” the school said.“During this month of the holy rosary,” the school continued, “we are dedicating ourselves to praying the rosary together each day as a school community. Families are also recording their prayers at home; rosaries, Masses, traditional devotions, and personal prayers spoken from the heart.” Three schools — Epiphany Catholic School in South El Monte, St. Anthony School in San Gabriel, and Santa Clara Elementary School in Oxnard — have also joined the initiative, according to the school.San Antonio Catholic schools to start accepting education saving accounts The Archdiocese of San Antonio says its Catholic schools will now officially accept tuition from the Texas education savings account (ESA) program. “Catholic schools in the Archdiocese of San Antonio are strongly promoting and participating in the Texas Education Freedom Accounts (TEFA) program, which provides funds for tuition at Catholic schools,” the archdiocese said in a statement to local media.Under the program, students at Catholic schools will be able to receive $10,000 to cover tuition costs that will be placed in a savings account, providing increased flexibility to parents. Inga Cotton, the founder and executive director of the San Antonio-based School Discovery Network, told media: “Catholic schools are some of the most affordable private schools in our region.” She added that for “so many of them, the annual tuition is already below what the ESA will cover. It makes it more affordable for families.”“Across the archdiocese, schools are preparing to welcome many new families through the launch of this effort,” the archdiocese said.The legislation “was the result of hard work from many people through the years, who have been consistently advocating to give parents a true choice in education for their children.”Pennsylvania diocese: State tax policy allows major break for donating to Catholic schoolsThe Diocese of Pittsburgh is encouraging residents to take advantage of the state’s tax policy, which grants major tax breaks to those who donate to Catholic schools. “The Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh is making it easier than ever for individuals and businesses to transform their Pennsylvania state tax dollars into tuition assistance for Catholic school students, at no additional cost to them,” the diocese said in a statement this month. “When you participate, you’re transforming lives,” Pittsburgh Bishop Mark Eckman said. “Every dollar given through this program helps open doors to a Catholic education that forms hearts, minds, and futures. It’s one of the simplest and most powerful ways to make a lasting difference for our children and our Church.”According to the diocese, the state’s Educational Improvement Tax Credit programs enable participants to receive a 90% state tax credit when they contribute to the diocese’s approved scholarship fund. The diocese has launched an online resource that offers step-by-step instructions on how to participate.

unitedyam

null / Credit: RasyidArt/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 22, 2025 / 10:07 am (CNA).

Here’s a roundup of the latest Catholic education news in the United States:

Catholic college graduates leading in purpose, belonging, financial stability, report says

Graduates of Catholic colleges and universities are outperforming other students in purpose and belonging and are reporting higher levels of mental health and financial stability, a report has found. 

Students from Catholic institutions of higher education are 7% more likely to view their careers as meaningful, 14% more likely to report a strong sense of belonging, and 17% more likely to say they are satisfied with their mental health, according to this year’s Holistic Impact Report.

The annual report is published by the Center for Catholic Studies at St. Mary’s University (San Antonio) in partnership with YouGov. 

The report also found that Catholic university graduates are more than 50% more likely to say their education encouraged them to engage in faith-based conversations and 12% more likely to say their courses promoted dialogue across differing perspectives. 

“Higher education has been disrupted by political battles and financial pressures,” stated Jason King, the Beirne director and chair of the Center for Catholic Studies at St. Mary’s University. 

But “Catholic higher education does not appear to be caught in those tides,” he said.

“With two years of data, we can see that it continues to form graduates for meaningful lives, community engagement, and ethical decision-making. And, because of this focus, it also supports graduates’ mental, financial, and social well-being.”

Los Angeles-area school aims to ‘raise’ 1 million prayers by All Saints’ Day 

A Catholic school in California is leading an initiative to “raise” 1 million prayers by All Saints’ Day. 

“This special initiative began on the eve of the canonizations of St. Carlo Acutis and St. Pier Giorgio Frassati, two modern witnesses who remind us that holiness is possible for everyone, especially the young,” St. Joseph School explained in a Facebook post on Oct. 3.

“Inspired by their example, our students, families, and faculty have already prayed more than 150,000 prayers… and we’re just getting started!” the school said.

“During this month of the holy rosary,” the school continued, “we are dedicating ourselves to praying the rosary together each day as a school community. Families are also recording their prayers at home; rosaries, Masses, traditional devotions, and personal prayers spoken from the heart.” 

Three schools — Epiphany Catholic School in South El Monte, St. Anthony School in San Gabriel, and Santa Clara Elementary School in Oxnard — have also joined the initiative, according to the school.

San Antonio Catholic schools to start accepting education saving accounts 

The Archdiocese of San Antonio says its Catholic schools will now officially accept tuition from the Texas education savings account (ESA) program. 

“Catholic schools in the Archdiocese of San Antonio are strongly promoting and participating in the Texas Education Freedom Accounts (TEFA) program, which provides funds for tuition at Catholic schools,” the archdiocese said in a statement to local media.

Under the program, students at Catholic schools will be able to receive $10,000 to cover tuition costs that will be placed in a savings account, providing increased flexibility to parents. 

Inga Cotton, the founder and executive director of the San Antonio-based School Discovery Network, told media: “Catholic schools are some of the most affordable private schools in our region.” 

She added that for “so many of them, the annual tuition is already below what the ESA will cover. It makes it more affordable for families.”

“Across the archdiocese, schools are preparing to welcome many new families through the launch of this effort,” the archdiocese said.

The legislation “was the result of hard work from many people through the years, who have been consistently advocating to give parents a true choice in education for their children.”

Pennsylvania diocese: State tax policy allows major break for donating to Catholic schools

The Diocese of Pittsburgh is encouraging residents to take advantage of the state’s tax policy, which grants major tax breaks to those who donate to Catholic schools. 

“The Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh is making it easier than ever for individuals and businesses to transform their Pennsylvania state tax dollars into tuition assistance for Catholic school students, at no additional cost to them,” the diocese said in a statement this month. 

“When you participate, you’re transforming lives,” Pittsburgh Bishop Mark Eckman said. “Every dollar given through this program helps open doors to a Catholic education that forms hearts, minds, and futures. It’s one of the simplest and most powerful ways to make a lasting difference for our children and our Church.”

According to the diocese, the state’s Educational Improvement Tax Credit programs enable participants to receive a 90% state tax credit when they contribute to the diocese’s approved scholarship fund. 

The diocese has launched an online resource that offers step-by-step instructions on how to participate.

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
Study: Biblical definition of marriage high among churchgoers, definition of family less so #Catholic null / Credit: Ivan Galashchuk/Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 14, 2025 / 13:38 pm (CNA). A recent study found that among adults who attend Christian worship at least monthly, 68% agreed marriage is between one man and one woman, but only 46% defined “family” in corresponding terms of a husband and wife, their children, and relatives.Family Research Council in partnership with the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University released findings this week from a new national survey of 1,003 churchgoing adults. The survey, “Social Issues and Worldview,” was conducted in July to build off a similar 2023 study. The research identified beliefs of the faithful in regard to social topics and family life.Of the 9 in 10 respondents identifying as Christian, 39% were Catholic, 20% mainline Protestant, 18% evangelical, 9% independent or nondenominational Christian, and 4% Pentecostal.Among the respondents, about 22% claimed the definition of family changes over time and across cultures. About 20% said family is any group of people who care for one another, 6% said family is any group of people who live together, and 6% said they did not know how to describe family.No demographic or Christian group was found to have a clear majority in support of the biblical definition of family, but the highest support came from theologically defined born-again Christians (59%) and Pentecostal churchgoers (56%). The majority of respondents did agree on a number of other family-related topics. Of churchgoing adults, 70% said it is important for society to facilitate families with a father, mother, and children living together and 68% said they believe marriage is only between a man and a woman.Christian stances on social issues and need for discipleship The report found churchgoers are open to more discipleship and teaching on a number of current social issues. A large majority reported that additional worldview training is desirable in areas regarding religious freedom (88%), social and political responsibility (76%), and abortion and the value of life (60%).The research revealed more specific Christian views on pro-life topics including abortion and euthanasia. About 25% of churchgoing respondents said they would prefer their church to preach or teach about abortion at worship services more often, while 18% said they would prefer teachings on the topic less often. Those interested in increasing preaching on the topic mostly attend either evangelical (31%) or Pentecostal churches (31%), while adults who align with independent and nondenominational churches were the least interested in increasing the number of sermons on abortion (19%). Interest among Catholics in increasing the frequency fell from 41% to 29% since 2023.Respondents were asked their beliefs in regard to the statement: “Euthanasia is morally wrong.” Less than half of churchgoers (43%) said they agreed, another 23% said they disagreed, and 35% said they were unsure and did not know whether euthanasia was right or wrong.Overwhelming majorities agreed that people should be able to practice “peaceful, genuinely held religious beliefs without being punished by the government, even if those beliefs are not culturally popular” (83%), that “every person is made in the likeness of God” (84%), and that “every human being has undeniable value and dignity” (83%).
Read More

Study: Biblical definition of marriage high among churchgoers, definition of family less so #Catholic null / Credit: Ivan Galashchuk/Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 14, 2025 / 13:38 pm (CNA). A recent study found that among adults who attend Christian worship at least monthly, 68% agreed marriage is between one man and one woman, but only 46% defined “family” in corresponding terms of a husband and wife, their children, and relatives.Family Research Council in partnership with the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University released findings this week from a new national survey of 1,003 churchgoing adults. The survey, “Social Issues and Worldview,” was conducted in July to build off a similar 2023 study. The research identified beliefs of the faithful in regard to social topics and family life.Of the 9 in 10 respondents identifying as Christian, 39% were Catholic, 20% mainline Protestant, 18% evangelical, 9% independent or nondenominational Christian, and 4% Pentecostal.Among the respondents, about 22% claimed the definition of family changes over time and across cultures. About 20% said family is any group of people who care for one another, 6% said family is any group of people who live together, and 6% said they did not know how to describe family.No demographic or Christian group was found to have a clear majority in support of the biblical definition of family, but the highest support came from theologically defined born-again Christians (59%) and Pentecostal churchgoers (56%). The majority of respondents did agree on a number of other family-related topics. Of churchgoing adults, 70% said it is important for society to facilitate families with a father, mother, and children living together and 68% said they believe marriage is only between a man and a woman.Christian stances on social issues and need for discipleship The report found churchgoers are open to more discipleship and teaching on a number of current social issues. A large majority reported that additional worldview training is desirable in areas regarding religious freedom (88%), social and political responsibility (76%), and abortion and the value of life (60%).The research revealed more specific Christian views on pro-life topics including abortion and euthanasia. About 25% of churchgoing respondents said they would prefer their church to preach or teach about abortion at worship services more often, while 18% said they would prefer teachings on the topic less often. Those interested in increasing preaching on the topic mostly attend either evangelical (31%) or Pentecostal churches (31%), while adults who align with independent and nondenominational churches were the least interested in increasing the number of sermons on abortion (19%). Interest among Catholics in increasing the frequency fell from 41% to 29% since 2023.Respondents were asked their beliefs in regard to the statement: “Euthanasia is morally wrong.” Less than half of churchgoers (43%) said they agreed, another 23% said they disagreed, and 35% said they were unsure and did not know whether euthanasia was right or wrong.Overwhelming majorities agreed that people should be able to practice “peaceful, genuinely held religious beliefs without being punished by the government, even if those beliefs are not culturally popular” (83%), that “every person is made in the likeness of God” (84%), and that “every human being has undeniable value and dignity” (83%).

unitedyam

null / Credit: Ivan Galashchuk/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 14, 2025 / 13:38 pm (CNA).

A recent study found that among adults who attend Christian worship at least monthly, 68% agreed marriage is between one man and one woman, but only 46% defined “family” in corresponding terms of a husband and wife, their children, and relatives.

Family Research Council in partnership with the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University released findings this week from a new national survey of 1,003 churchgoing adults. The survey, “Social Issues and Worldview,” was conducted in July to build off a similar 2023 study. The research identified beliefs of the faithful in regard to social topics and family life.

Of the 9 in 10 respondents identifying as Christian, 39% were Catholic, 20% mainline Protestant, 18% evangelical, 9% independent or nondenominational Christian, and 4% Pentecostal.

Among the respondents, about 22% claimed the definition of family changes over time and across cultures. About 20% said family is any group of people who care for one another, 6% said family is any group of people who live together, and 6% said they did not know how to describe family.

No demographic or Christian group was found to have a clear majority in support of the biblical definition of family, but the highest support came from theologically defined born-again Christians (59%) and Pentecostal churchgoers (56%). 

The majority of respondents did agree on a number of other family-related topics. Of churchgoing adults, 70% said it is important for society to facilitate families with a father, mother, and children living together and 68% said they believe marriage is only between a man and a woman.

Christian stances on social issues and need for discipleship 

The report found churchgoers are open to more discipleship and teaching on a number of current social issues. A large majority reported that additional worldview training is desirable in areas regarding religious freedom (88%), social and political responsibility (76%), and abortion and the value of life (60%).

The research revealed more specific Christian views on pro-life topics including abortion and euthanasia. About 25% of churchgoing respondents said they would prefer their church to preach or teach about abortion at worship services more often, while 18% said they would prefer teachings on the topic less often. 

Those interested in increasing preaching on the topic mostly attend either evangelical (31%) or Pentecostal churches (31%), while adults who align with independent and nondenominational churches were the least interested in increasing the number of sermons on abortion (19%). Interest among Catholics in increasing the frequency fell from 41% to 29% since 2023.

Respondents were asked their beliefs in regard to the statement: “Euthanasia is morally wrong.” Less than half of churchgoers (43%) said they agreed, another 23% said they disagreed, and 35% said they were unsure and did not know whether euthanasia was right or wrong.

Overwhelming majorities agreed that people should be able to practice “peaceful, genuinely held religious beliefs without being punished by the government, even if those beliefs are not culturally popular” (83%), that “every person is made in the likeness of God” (84%), and that “every human being has undeniable value and dignity” (83%).

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
Relic that appeared to move on its own ‘not of supernatural origin,’ diocese says #Catholic The relic of St. Gemma Galgani rests in the reliquary at the Newman Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025. / Credit: Corbin Hubbell CNA Staff, Oct 10, 2025 / 15:07 pm (CNA). The Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska, has determined that a moving relic was “not of supernatural origin” after video of the apparent phenomenon spread across social media.The viral video depicted a first-class relic of St. Gemma Galgani appearing to move of its own accord behind a display case.A relic of St. Gemma Galgani has reportedly moved within its sealed reliquary at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln’s Newman Center, drawing Catholics from across the state eager to witness it.Video: Lillian Johnson pic.twitter.com/DngPROJScQ— Sachin Jose (@Sachinettiyil) October 8, 2025 Visitors reportedly came to the Newman Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln to see the apparently moving relic. But a diocesan investigation found that the source of the movement was a bent hook. Father Caleb La Rue, the chancellor for the Diocese of Lincoln, investigated whether the moving relic could be of supernatural origin with the help of another priest.  He told CNA that the Church has to look at such things with a “healthy skepticism” to see if there are any “natural” causes of the occurrences. “Not that these things can’t happen — of course, they absolutely can,” he said. “God can work in any myriad of ways.” La Rue found that the hook was bent, causing a similar relic to move in the same way when hung on the same hook. When St. Gemma’s relic was removed from the hook, it ceased moving on its own. La Rue said because of the bend in the hook, the weight of the reliquary was likely “not evenly distributed.” Artifacts are displayed in the reliquary at the Newman Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025. Credit: Corbin HubbellBut La Rue also noted that miracles do happen and encouraged people to look for the ordinary ways God shows his presence in our lives. “Even if it’s not supernatural, I think there’s something that God wants all of us to take away from this experience because he either willed or permitted it to happen,” La Rue said.What qualifies as a miracle?Church authorities investigate alleged miracles when they receive reports of them. Apparently miraculous phenomena often have to do with the Eucharist, Marian apparitions, and miracles of healing, among others. Michael O’Neill, a miracle expert who developed a miracle-tracking website and hosts the EWTN show “Miracle Hunter,” told CNA that the Church “would not in modern times investigate a moving relic.” “Traditionally, only a few types of miracles are ever investigated, specifically healing miracles, Marian apparitions, Eucharistic miracles, weeping statues or icons, and incorrupt saints,” O’Neill said. “And each has their own investigative process.” La Rue, however, noted that it’s not impossible for a relic to be moving miraculously in this way. “It’s, of course, possible. There’s far more miraculous things that happen every day,” La Rue said. “You don’t want to prematurely begin dampening the fervor. But at the same time, the Church is cautious for a reason because she wants our attention to be on truly miraculous things.”Do miracles still occur? The Church has documented many miracles related to healing, the Eucharist, and Marian apparitions.Healing miracles are especially important in the investigation of potential saints. Would-be-saints need several miraculous healings to be attributed to their intercession before the Church will canonize them.These healing miracles undergo a scrutinous investigation in line with what is called “the Lambertini Criteria,” according to O’Neill. A miracle can be confirmed only if there is no possible scientific explanation for the healing.The Diocese of Lincoln noted in a statement that miracles still do occur, especially the miracle of the Eucharist, where the consecrated bread and wine become Jesus’ body, blood, soul, and divinity. “God surrounds us with miracles every day, with the Lord’s real presence in the Blessed Sacrament being preeminent of all,” the diocese said in a statement shared with CNA on Thursday. La Rue noted that the Newman Center has all-day Eucharistic adoration, where students and staff come to pray in the presence of Jesus Christ. “The entire time this was happening, there was Eucharistic exposition going on,” La Rue said. He noted that the Eucharist “is the ultimate sign of God’s abiding presence with his people and his desire to be a part of our life.” “Even if this wasn’t what some people were hoping it would be, it doesn’t mean that God isn’t still very active in our lives,” La Rue said. “Sometimes we maybe just don’t pay attention to the little ways in which he is.”O’Neill noted that the official norms for addressing miracles were adjusted last year, meaning that the Church doesn’t explicitly declare occurrences to be supernatural, but rather uses the designation “nihil obstat,” meaning “nothing obstructs.” This means that the miracle has “signs” of the Holy Spirit and nothing “critical or risky” has been detected. While nihil obstat is the highest designation a proposed miracle can receive in modern times, the Vatican, according to the recent norms, can also denounce alleged miracles if the Church finds them to be concerning, not of supernatural origin, or even fraudulent. La Rue encouraged those who had hoped for a miracle to “be mindful of the ordinary ways in which God communicates his love and his grace to us throughout the day.”“It doesn’t necessarily need to be something spectacular, but there’s lots of little ways that God is constantly showing us his care for us,” La Rue said. A thriving faith community La Rue, who is in residence at the Newman Center, noted that the vibrant community is growing. “It’s a place where young people are really encountering Our Lord and encountering each other and building strong friendships and lasting friendships founded on shared love of God and wanting to live a full life, a joyful life,” La Rue said. About 70 people entered the Church through the center’s OCIA program last year. “The number of people who came to join the church last year who just literally just showed up — nobody went and found them,” La Rue said. “We certainly have those people, but a lot of them just came on their own.” Sunday Mass, he said, is “standing room only.” “I’ve been able to see just the reality of young people recognizing that the world doesn’t have the answers — that the things of the world aren’t satisfying,” he said. “And they come here to find actual peace and love and freedom in Our Lord.”
Read More

Relic that appeared to move on its own ‘not of supernatural origin,’ diocese says #Catholic The relic of St. Gemma Galgani rests in the reliquary at the Newman Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025. / Credit: Corbin Hubbell CNA Staff, Oct 10, 2025 / 15:07 pm (CNA). The Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska, has determined that a moving relic was “not of supernatural origin” after video of the apparent phenomenon spread across social media.The viral video depicted a first-class relic of St. Gemma Galgani appearing to move of its own accord behind a display case.A relic of St. Gemma Galgani has reportedly moved within its sealed reliquary at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln’s Newman Center, drawing Catholics from across the state eager to witness it.Video: Lillian Johnson pic.twitter.com/DngPROJScQ— Sachin Jose (@Sachinettiyil) October 8, 2025 Visitors reportedly came to the Newman Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln to see the apparently moving relic. But a diocesan investigation found that the source of the movement was a bent hook. Father Caleb La Rue, the chancellor for the Diocese of Lincoln, investigated whether the moving relic could be of supernatural origin with the help of another priest.  He told CNA that the Church has to look at such things with a “healthy skepticism” to see if there are any “natural” causes of the occurrences. “Not that these things can’t happen — of course, they absolutely can,” he said. “God can work in any myriad of ways.” La Rue found that the hook was bent, causing a similar relic to move in the same way when hung on the same hook. When St. Gemma’s relic was removed from the hook, it ceased moving on its own. La Rue said because of the bend in the hook, the weight of the reliquary was likely “not evenly distributed.” Artifacts are displayed in the reliquary at the Newman Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025. Credit: Corbin HubbellBut La Rue also noted that miracles do happen and encouraged people to look for the ordinary ways God shows his presence in our lives. “Even if it’s not supernatural, I think there’s something that God wants all of us to take away from this experience because he either willed or permitted it to happen,” La Rue said.What qualifies as a miracle?Church authorities investigate alleged miracles when they receive reports of them. Apparently miraculous phenomena often have to do with the Eucharist, Marian apparitions, and miracles of healing, among others. Michael O’Neill, a miracle expert who developed a miracle-tracking website and hosts the EWTN show “Miracle Hunter,” told CNA that the Church “would not in modern times investigate a moving relic.” “Traditionally, only a few types of miracles are ever investigated, specifically healing miracles, Marian apparitions, Eucharistic miracles, weeping statues or icons, and incorrupt saints,” O’Neill said. “And each has their own investigative process.” La Rue, however, noted that it’s not impossible for a relic to be moving miraculously in this way. “It’s, of course, possible. There’s far more miraculous things that happen every day,” La Rue said. “You don’t want to prematurely begin dampening the fervor. But at the same time, the Church is cautious for a reason because she wants our attention to be on truly miraculous things.”Do miracles still occur? The Church has documented many miracles related to healing, the Eucharist, and Marian apparitions.Healing miracles are especially important in the investigation of potential saints. Would-be-saints need several miraculous healings to be attributed to their intercession before the Church will canonize them.These healing miracles undergo a scrutinous investigation in line with what is called “the Lambertini Criteria,” according to O’Neill. A miracle can be confirmed only if there is no possible scientific explanation for the healing.The Diocese of Lincoln noted in a statement that miracles still do occur, especially the miracle of the Eucharist, where the consecrated bread and wine become Jesus’ body, blood, soul, and divinity. “God surrounds us with miracles every day, with the Lord’s real presence in the Blessed Sacrament being preeminent of all,” the diocese said in a statement shared with CNA on Thursday. La Rue noted that the Newman Center has all-day Eucharistic adoration, where students and staff come to pray in the presence of Jesus Christ. “The entire time this was happening, there was Eucharistic exposition going on,” La Rue said. He noted that the Eucharist “is the ultimate sign of God’s abiding presence with his people and his desire to be a part of our life.” “Even if this wasn’t what some people were hoping it would be, it doesn’t mean that God isn’t still very active in our lives,” La Rue said. “Sometimes we maybe just don’t pay attention to the little ways in which he is.”O’Neill noted that the official norms for addressing miracles were adjusted last year, meaning that the Church doesn’t explicitly declare occurrences to be supernatural, but rather uses the designation “nihil obstat,” meaning “nothing obstructs.” This means that the miracle has “signs” of the Holy Spirit and nothing “critical or risky” has been detected. While nihil obstat is the highest designation a proposed miracle can receive in modern times, the Vatican, according to the recent norms, can also denounce alleged miracles if the Church finds them to be concerning, not of supernatural origin, or even fraudulent. La Rue encouraged those who had hoped for a miracle to “be mindful of the ordinary ways in which God communicates his love and his grace to us throughout the day.”“It doesn’t necessarily need to be something spectacular, but there’s lots of little ways that God is constantly showing us his care for us,” La Rue said. A thriving faith community La Rue, who is in residence at the Newman Center, noted that the vibrant community is growing. “It’s a place where young people are really encountering Our Lord and encountering each other and building strong friendships and lasting friendships founded on shared love of God and wanting to live a full life, a joyful life,” La Rue said. About 70 people entered the Church through the center’s OCIA program last year. “The number of people who came to join the church last year who just literally just showed up — nobody went and found them,” La Rue said. “We certainly have those people, but a lot of them just came on their own.” Sunday Mass, he said, is “standing room only.” “I’ve been able to see just the reality of young people recognizing that the world doesn’t have the answers — that the things of the world aren’t satisfying,” he said. “And they come here to find actual peace and love and freedom in Our Lord.”

unitedyam

The relic of St. Gemma Galgani rests in the reliquary at the Newman Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025. / Credit: Corbin Hubbell

CNA Staff, Oct 10, 2025 / 15:07 pm (CNA).

The Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska, has determined that a moving relic was “not of supernatural origin” after video of the apparent phenomenon spread across social media.

The viral video depicted a first-class relic of St. Gemma Galgani appearing to move of its own accord behind a display case.

Visitors reportedly came to the Newman Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln to see the apparently moving relic. 

But a diocesan investigation found that the source of the movement was a bent hook. 

Father Caleb La Rue, the chancellor for the Diocese of Lincoln, investigated whether the moving relic could be of supernatural origin with the help of another priest.  

He told CNA that the Church has to look at such things with a “healthy skepticism” to see if there are any “natural” causes of the occurrences. 

“Not that these things can’t happen — of course, they absolutely can,” he said. “God can work in any myriad of ways.” 

La Rue found that the hook was bent, causing a similar relic to move in the same way when hung on the same hook. When St. Gemma’s relic was removed from the hook, it ceased moving on its own. La Rue said because of the bend in the hook, the weight of the reliquary was likely “not evenly distributed.” 

Artifacts are displayed in the reliquary at the Newman Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025. Credit: Corbin Hubbell
Artifacts are displayed in the reliquary at the Newman Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025. Credit: Corbin Hubbell

But La Rue also noted that miracles do happen and encouraged people to look for the ordinary ways God shows his presence in our lives. 

“Even if it’s not supernatural, I think there’s something that God wants all of us to take away from this experience because he either willed or permitted it to happen,” La Rue said.

What qualifies as a miracle?

Church authorities investigate alleged miracles when they receive reports of them. Apparently miraculous phenomena often have to do with the Eucharist, Marian apparitions, and miracles of healing, among others. 

Michael O’Neill, a miracle expert who developed a miracle-tracking website and hosts the EWTN show “Miracle Hunter,” told CNA that the Church “would not in modern times investigate a moving relic.” 

“Traditionally, only a few types of miracles are ever investigated, specifically healing miracles, Marian apparitions, Eucharistic miracles, weeping statues or icons, and incorrupt saints,” O’Neill said. “And each has their own investigative process.” 

La Rue, however, noted that it’s not impossible for a relic to be moving miraculously in this way. 

“It’s, of course, possible. There’s far more miraculous things that happen every day,” La Rue said. “You don’t want to prematurely begin dampening the fervor. But at the same time, the Church is cautious for a reason because she wants our attention to be on truly miraculous things.”

Do miracles still occur? 

The Church has documented many miracles related to healing, the Eucharist, and Marian apparitions.

Healing miracles are especially important in the investigation of potential saints. Would-be-saints need several miraculous healings to be attributed to their intercession before the Church will canonize them.

These healing miracles undergo a scrutinous investigation in line with what is called “the Lambertini Criteria,” according to O’Neill. A miracle can be confirmed only if there is no possible scientific explanation for the healing.

The Diocese of Lincoln noted in a statement that miracles still do occur, especially the miracle of the Eucharist, where the consecrated bread and wine become Jesus’ body, blood, soul, and divinity. 

“God surrounds us with miracles every day, with the Lord’s real presence in the Blessed Sacrament being preeminent of all,” the diocese said in a statement shared with CNA on Thursday. 

La Rue noted that the Newman Center has all-day Eucharistic adoration, where students and staff come to pray in the presence of Jesus Christ. 

“The entire time this was happening, there was Eucharistic exposition going on,” La Rue said. 

He noted that the Eucharist “is the ultimate sign of God’s abiding presence with his people and his desire to be a part of our life.” 

“Even if this wasn’t what some people were hoping it would be, it doesn’t mean that God isn’t still very active in our lives,” La Rue said. “Sometimes we maybe just don’t pay attention to the little ways in which he is.”

O’Neill noted that the official norms for addressing miracles were adjusted last year, meaning that the Church doesn’t explicitly declare occurrences to be supernatural, but rather uses the designation “nihil obstat,” meaning “nothing obstructs.” 

This means that the miracle has “signs” of the Holy Spirit and nothing “critical or risky” has been detected. 

While nihil obstat is the highest designation a proposed miracle can receive in modern times, the Vatican, according to the recent norms, can also denounce alleged miracles if the Church finds them to be concerning, not of supernatural origin, or even fraudulent. 

La Rue encouraged those who had hoped for a miracle to “be mindful of the ordinary ways in which God communicates his love and his grace to us throughout the day.”

“It doesn’t necessarily need to be something spectacular, but there’s lots of little ways that God is constantly showing us his care for us,” La Rue said. 

A thriving faith community 

La Rue, who is in residence at the Newman Center, noted that the vibrant community is growing. 

“It’s a place where young people are really encountering Our Lord and encountering each other and building strong friendships and lasting friendships founded on shared love of God and wanting to live a full life, a joyful life,” La Rue said. 

About 70 people entered the Church through the center’s OCIA program last year. 

“The number of people who came to join the church last year who just literally just showed up — nobody went and found them,” La Rue said. “We certainly have those people, but a lot of them just came on their own.” 

Sunday Mass, he said, is “standing room only.” 

“I’ve been able to see just the reality of young people recognizing that the world doesn’t have the answers — that the things of the world aren’t satisfying,” he said. “And they come here to find actual peace and love and freedom in Our Lord.”

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

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

unitedyam

null / Credit: Brian A Jackson/Shutterstock

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read More
Native American group loses religious freedom appeal at Supreme Court #Catholic On Oct. 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a rehearing of the case filed by Apache Stronghold, a coalition of Native Americans and their supporters, that would have prevented the sale of a Native American sacred site to a mining company. / Credit: Photo courtesy of Becket CNA Staff, Oct 8, 2025 / 12:00 pm (CNA). A Native American group working to stop the destruction of a centuries-old religious ritual site has lost a last-ditch appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the transfer and obliteration of the Arizona parcel.The Supreme Court in an unsigned order on Oct. 6 said Apache Stronghold’s petition for a rehearing had been denied. The court did not give a reason for the denial.Justice Neil Gorsuch would have granted the request, the order noted. Justice Samuel Alito, meanwhile, “took no part in the consideration or decision” of the order. The denial likely deals a death blow to the Apache group’s attempts to halt the destruction of Oak Flat, which has been viewed as a sacred site by Apaches and other Native American groups for hundreds of years and has been used extensively for religious rituals. The federal government is selling the land to the multinational Resolution Copper company, which plans to destroy the site as part of a copper mining operation. The coalition had brought the lawsuit to the Supreme Court earlier this year under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, arguing that the sale of the site would violate the decades-old federal statute restricting the government’s ability to encroach on religious liberty. The high court in May refused to hear the case. Gorsuch dissented from that decision as well, arguing that the court “should at least have troubled itself to hear [the] case” before “allowing the government to destroy the Apaches’ sacred site.”Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the May ruling as well, though he did not add his dissent to the Oct. 6 denial of the appeal. In a statement, Apache Stronghold said that while the decision was "deeply disappointing, the fight to protect Oak Flat is far from over." The group vowed to "continue pressing our cases in the lower courts.""Oak Flat deserves the same respect and protection this country has long given to other places of worship," the group said. The coalition has garnered support from major Catholic backers in its religious liberty bid. Last year the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops joined an amicus brief arguing that lower court decisions allowing the sale of Oak Flat represent “a grave misunderstanding” of religious freedom law. The Knights of Columbus similarly filed a brief in support of the Apaches, arguing that the decision to allow the property to be mined applies an “atextual constraint” to the federal religious freedom law with “no grounding in the statute itself.”Though Apache Stronghold appears to have exhausted its legal options, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit said on Aug. 18 that the Oak Flat site would not be transferred to Resolution Copper amid emergency petitions from the San Carlos Apache Tribe as well as the Arizona Mining Reform Coalition. That dispute is still playing out at federal court.
Read More

Native American group loses religious freedom appeal at Supreme Court #Catholic On Oct. 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a rehearing of the case filed by Apache Stronghold, a coalition of Native Americans and their supporters, that would have prevented the sale of a Native American sacred site to a mining company. / Credit: Photo courtesy of Becket CNA Staff, Oct 8, 2025 / 12:00 pm (CNA). A Native American group working to stop the destruction of a centuries-old religious ritual site has lost a last-ditch appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the transfer and obliteration of the Arizona parcel.The Supreme Court in an unsigned order on Oct. 6 said Apache Stronghold’s petition for a rehearing had been denied. The court did not give a reason for the denial.Justice Neil Gorsuch would have granted the request, the order noted. Justice Samuel Alito, meanwhile, “took no part in the consideration or decision” of the order. The denial likely deals a death blow to the Apache group’s attempts to halt the destruction of Oak Flat, which has been viewed as a sacred site by Apaches and other Native American groups for hundreds of years and has been used extensively for religious rituals. The federal government is selling the land to the multinational Resolution Copper company, which plans to destroy the site as part of a copper mining operation. The coalition had brought the lawsuit to the Supreme Court earlier this year under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, arguing that the sale of the site would violate the decades-old federal statute restricting the government’s ability to encroach on religious liberty. The high court in May refused to hear the case. Gorsuch dissented from that decision as well, arguing that the court “should at least have troubled itself to hear [the] case” before “allowing the government to destroy the Apaches’ sacred site.”Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the May ruling as well, though he did not add his dissent to the Oct. 6 denial of the appeal. In a statement, Apache Stronghold said that while the decision was “deeply disappointing, the fight to protect Oak Flat is far from over.” The group vowed to “continue pressing our cases in the lower courts.””Oak Flat deserves the same respect and protection this country has long given to other places of worship,” the group said. The coalition has garnered support from major Catholic backers in its religious liberty bid. Last year the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops joined an amicus brief arguing that lower court decisions allowing the sale of Oak Flat represent “a grave misunderstanding” of religious freedom law. The Knights of Columbus similarly filed a brief in support of the Apaches, arguing that the decision to allow the property to be mined applies an “atextual constraint” to the federal religious freedom law with “no grounding in the statute itself.”Though Apache Stronghold appears to have exhausted its legal options, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit said on Aug. 18 that the Oak Flat site would not be transferred to Resolution Copper amid emergency petitions from the San Carlos Apache Tribe as well as the Arizona Mining Reform Coalition. That dispute is still playing out at federal court.

unitedyam

On Oct. 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a rehearing of the case filed by Apache Stronghold, a coalition of Native Americans and their supporters, that would have prevented the sale of a Native American sacred site to a mining company. / Credit: Photo courtesy of Becket

CNA Staff, Oct 8, 2025 / 12:00 pm (CNA).

A Native American group working to stop the destruction of a centuries-old religious ritual site has lost a last-ditch appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the transfer and obliteration of the Arizona parcel.

The Supreme Court in an unsigned order on Oct. 6 said Apache Stronghold’s petition for a rehearing had been denied. The court did not give a reason for the denial.

Justice Neil Gorsuch would have granted the request, the order noted. Justice Samuel Alito, meanwhile, “took no part in the consideration or decision” of the order. 

The denial likely deals a death blow to the Apache group’s attempts to halt the destruction of Oak Flat, which has been viewed as a sacred site by Apaches and other Native American groups for hundreds of years and has been used extensively for religious rituals. 

The federal government is selling the land to the multinational Resolution Copper company, which plans to destroy the site as part of a copper mining operation. 

The coalition had brought the lawsuit to the Supreme Court earlier this year under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, arguing that the sale of the site would violate the decades-old federal statute restricting the government’s ability to encroach on religious liberty. 

The high court in May refused to hear the case. Gorsuch dissented from that decision as well, arguing that the court “should at least have troubled itself to hear [the] case” before “allowing the government to destroy the Apaches’ sacred site.”

Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the May ruling as well, though he did not add his dissent to the Oct. 6 denial of the appeal. 

In a statement, Apache Stronghold said that while the decision was “deeply disappointing, the fight to protect Oak Flat is far from over.”

The group vowed to “continue pressing our cases in the lower courts.”

“Oak Flat deserves the same respect and protection this country has long given to other places of worship,” the group said.

The coalition has garnered support from major Catholic backers in its religious liberty bid. Last year the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops joined an amicus brief arguing that lower court decisions allowing the sale of Oak Flat represent “a grave misunderstanding” of religious freedom law. 

The Knights of Columbus similarly filed a brief in support of the Apaches, arguing that the decision to allow the property to be mined applies an “atextual constraint” to the federal religious freedom law with “no grounding in the statute itself.”

Though Apache Stronghold appears to have exhausted its legal options, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit said on Aug. 18 that the Oak Flat site would not be transferred to Resolution Copper amid emergency petitions from the San Carlos Apache Tribe as well as the Arizona Mining Reform Coalition. That dispute is still playing out at federal court.

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

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

unitedyam

null / Credit: Wolfgang Schaller|Shutterstock

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Free speech and viewpoint discrimination

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Banning ‘voluntary conversations’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

unitedyam

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read More
Religious Liberty Commission hears from teachers, coaches, school leaders
Read More

Religious Liberty Commission hears from teachers, coaches, school leaders

unitedyam

President Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission meets on Sept. 29, 2025, in Washington, D.C. / Credit: Tessa Gervasini/CNA

Washington, D.C., Sep 29, 2025 / 19:13 pm (CNA).

Teachers, coaches, and other public and private school leaders said their religious liberty was threatened in American schools at a hearing conducted by President Donald Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission on Sept. 29.

Speakers said there must be a fight for schools to bring back the “truth” to protect students and religious liberty. Joe Kennedy, a high school football coach; Monica Gill, a high school teacher; Marisol Arroyo-Castro, a seventh grade teacher; and Keisha Russell, a lawyer for First Liberty Institute, addressed the commission led by Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick.

“There has to be a call to action,” commission member Dr. Phil McGraw said. “The most common way to lose power is to think you don’t have it to begin with. We do have power, and we need to rally with that power.”

Teachers and coaches describe experiences

Kennedy said he was suspended — and later fired — from his position as a football coach at Bremerton High School in Washington for praying a brief and quiet prayer after football games.

“After the game, I took a knee to say thanks,” Kennedy explained. “That’s all. If that could be turned into a national controversy, it says more about the confusion in our country than the conduct of the person performing it.”

Kennedy told the commission the law is “cloudy and muddy” and they “have the power to clarify it.” Kennedy also said some lawyers “need to be held accountable” for actions taken in religious liberty cases.

Kennedy said: “I don’t know a lot about law and liberty, but I know that you’re supposed to advise people on the truth and the facts, and they’re not. They have an agenda, and their agenda is well set and in place and is working very well, keeping prayer out of the public square. They’re still doing it. That needs to be exposed.”

“Being a teacher has been one of the greatest blessings of my life,” Gill said to the committee. “God really gave my heart a mission … to show all of my students every day that they are loved. No matter what they’re going through, no matter what their grades are, no matter what their status is with their peers, I love them.”

“But in the summer of 2021 … Loudoun County Public Schools adopted a policy that forced teachers to deny the foundational truth of what it means to be human, created as male and female,” Gill said.

“This policy forced teachers to affirm all transgender students,” Gill said. “My employer gave teachers a choice: deny truth or risk everything … I knew that I could not stand in front of my Father in heaven one day and say: ‘My pension plan was more important than your truth.’ I also knew that if I say that I love my students, the only right choice would be to stand in love and truth for them.”

To combat the policy, Gill joined a lawsuit by Alliance Defending Freedom after a fellow Virginia teacher was fired for speaking out against the same policy. The lawsuit “resulted in victory for all teachers to freely speak truth and love when Loudoun County finally agreed not to require teachers to use pronouns in accordance with the student’s sex,” Gill said.

Arroyo-Castro testified that she was punished for displaying a cross in her private workspace in her seventh grade classroom in a New Britain School District school in Connecticut. 

“I share this with you to help you understand why the crucifix is so significant to me and why I will never hide it from anyone’s view,” Arroyo-Castro said. “The vice principal told me that the crucifix was of a religious nature, so against the Constitution of the United States, and that it had to be taken down by the end of the day.”

If she did not take it down it would be considered “insubordination and could lead to termination,” Arroyo-Castro said. She asked if she could have time to pray on it, and was told she could, but “it wouldn’t change anything.” 

“I was later called to a meeting with the district chief of staff, the principal, the vice principal, [and a] union representative. The chief of staff suggested that I put the crucifix in a drawer. I knew I couldn’t do that since my grandmother has instilled in me the meaning of the crucifix and how it should be treated with respect. But the chief of staff said that the Constitution says that I had to take it down,” Arroyo-Castro said.

After she refused to remove it, Arroyo-Castro was released from school with an unpaid suspension. She was offered legal defense by lawyers at First Liberty, which sued the school for violating the Constitution. While the lawsuit is ongoing she works in the administrative building “far from the students.”

Arroyo-Castro said: “Every day, I wonder how they’re doing.”

“Please do what you can to educate the districts in American schools about the true meaning of the establishment clause and the free exercise clause,” Arroyo-Castro advised the commission members. “How can we do our jobs well when many education leaders today don’t understand the Constitution themselves? We must understand as Americans that freedom of religion is a right that benefits all Americans.”

Suggestions from faith leaders

Leaders at Jewish, Catholic, and Christian schools also recounted religious freedom issues facing faith-based schools across the nation and what the country can do.

The leaders highlighted the need to protect the financial aid faith-based institutions receive and stop any threats of losing money if certain values are not enforced. Todd J. Williams, provost at Cairn University, said: “Schools will begin to cave because they’re worried about the millions of dollars that will go out the door.”

Father Robert Sirico, a priest at Sacred Heart Catholic School in Grand Rapids, Michigan, said he was recently affected by a decision by the Michigan Supreme Court that redefined sex to include sexual orientation and gender identity. 

“While presented as a matter of fairness, this reinterpretation proposes grave dangers, grave risks for all religious institutions, even those like Sacred Heart that receive absolutely no public support,” he said.

Sacred Heart has filed a lawsuit to combat the issue, but Sirico said what needs to be done “exceeds the competency of [the] commission and the competency of this administration.” 

“We have to think of this in existential terms, and we have to come at this project with the understanding that this is going to take years to transform. This is why religious people can transform the world: We believe in something that’s greater than our politics. We can reenvision.”

Read More
Trump, Vance among those honoring Charlie Kirk’s Christian legacy 
Read More

Trump, Vance among those honoring Charlie Kirk’s Christian legacy 

unitedyam

Erika Kirk embraces U.S. President Donald Trump at the conclusion of the memorial service held for Charlie Kirk in Glendale, Arizona, on Sept. 21, 2025. / Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Sep 22, 2025 / 09:35 am (CNA).

President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, Erika Kirk, and more than a dozen others gave speeches to honor the late Charlie Kirk at Sunday’s memorial service, highlighting his efforts to promote conservative values to young people and promote the Gospel on campus.

Some 90,000 people gathered for the memorial service at State Farm Stadium and an adjacent venue in Glendale, Arizona, on Sept. 21. Bishop Robert Barron, who had scheduled Kirk to come on his show, was among those in attendance.

Kirk, an evangelical Christian, was assassinated on Sept. 10 during an event at Utah Valley University while debating students on campus. At the time, Kirk was conversing with a young ideological opponent about transgenderism and gun violence. Prior to the question, he had been discussing his Christian faith with another questioner, something he often included in his conservative campus activism.

“What was even more important to Charlie than politics and service was the choice he made in the fifth grade — which he called the most important decision of his life — to become a Christian and a follower of his Savior Jesus Christ,” Trump, a self-identified nondenominational Christian, said during his speech.

Trump praised Kirk’s legacy of evangelizing the message of Christ and his activism to promote conservative values on campus, saying Kirk was “inspired by faith and his love of freedom” to establish the conservative campus organization Turning Point USA when he was just 18 years old.

“Charlie Kirk started with an idea only to change minds on college campuses and instead he ended up with a far greater achievement: changing history,” the president said. “… Today Charlie Kirk rests in heaven for all eternity. He has gone from speaking on campuses in Wisconsin to kneeling at the throne of God.”

Vance, a Catholic who often discussed theology with Kirk, spoke about Kirk’s devotion to honest debate in his campus activism, saying his “unshakable belief in the Gospel led him to see differences in opinion, not as battlefields to conquer but as waystations in the pursuit of truth.”

“He knew it was right to love others, your neighbor, your interlocutor, your enemy,” Vance said.
“But he also understood his duty to say what is right and what is wrong, to distinguish what is false from what is true.”

U.S. Vice President JD Vance speaks during the memorial service for slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk in Glendale, Arizona, on Sept. 21, 2025. Credit: Win McNamee/Getty Images
U.S. Vice President JD Vance speaks during the memorial service for slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk in Glendale, Arizona, on Sept. 21, 2025. Credit: Win McNamee/Getty Images

The vice president noted that even after death, Kirk’s message to defend life, to get married and start a family, and to follow Christ, continue to reach people. Vance said his own public appearances have been particularly influenced by Kirk after the assassination.

“I was telling somebody backstage that I always felt a little uncomfortable talking about my faith in public, as much as I love the Lord, as much as it was an important part of my life,” Vance told the crowd. “I’ve talked more about Jesus Christ in the past two weeks than I have my entire time in public life. And that is the undeniable legacy of the great Charlie Kirk. You know, he loved God and because he wanted to understand God’s creation and the men and women made in his image.”

Kirk’s widow forgives assassin

Kirk’s wife, Erika, said her husband’s devotion to Christ has influenced many Americans in the aftermath of the assassination.

“This past week, we saw people open a Bible for the first time in a decade, we saw people pray for the first time since they were children, we saw people go to a church service for the first time in their entire lives,” Erika Kirk said.

“Pray again, read the Bible again, go to Church next Sunday and the Sunday after that, and break free from the temptations and shackles of this world,” she urged the audience.

“Being a follower of Christ is not easy,” she continued. “It’s not supposed to be easy. Jesus said ‘if anyone would come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross and follow me.’ He said he would be persecuted, he said we would be persecuted, and Charlie knew that and happily carried his cross all the way to the end.”

Erika Kirk said he had gone onto Utah Valley University’s campus to show people, especially young men, “a better path and a better life that was right there for the taking.” She added: “He wanted to save young men, just like the one who took his life.”

Appealing to the Gospel message, Erika Kirk also extended forgiveness to the man who shot her husband. 

“On the cross, our Savior said, ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do,’” she said. “That man, that young man, I forgive him. I forgive him because it was what Christ did and is what Charlie would do. The answer to hate is not hate. The answer, we know from the Gospel, is love and always love. Love for our enemies and love for those who persecute us.”

‘I want to be remembered for courage for my faith’

Other speakers also highlighted Kirk’s emphasis on Christ in his campus activism. 

Donald Trump Jr. reminded the crowd that Kirk said just months before his death that if he were to die, “I want to be remembered for my courage for my faith.” 

“Those were not empty words,” Trump Jr. said. “Last week, Charlie joined a long line of courageous men and women who were martyred for what they believe.”

The country’s Health and Human Services secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a Catholic, said Kirk’s devotion to God modeled St. Francis of Assisi’s instruction to try to live one’s life in imitation of Christ.

“Charlie understood the great paradox: That it’s only by surrender to God that God’s power can flow into our lives and make us effective human beings,” Kennedy said. “Christ died at 33 years old, but he changed the trajectory of history. Charlie died at 31 years old, but because he had surrendered, he also now has changed the trajectory of history.” 

U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth similarly noted that Kirk “was a true believer,” one who understood that “Only Christ is King, our Lord and Savior.” 

“Our sins are washed away by the blood of Jesus,” Hegseth said. “Fear God and fear no man. That was Charlie Kirk.” 

Political commentator Tucker Carlson said Kirk was essentially “a Christian evangelist” who “was bringing the Gospel to the country.” 

“He also knew that politics wasn’t the final answer,” Carlson said. “It can’t answer the deepest questions, actually. That the only real solution is Jesus.”

Read More
NASA Astronaut Tracy Dyson Speaks to Students
Read More

NASA Astronaut Tracy Dyson Speaks to Students

unitedyam

NASA astronaut Tracy Dyson points to the Expedition 71 patch on her flight suit as she answers a question from students, Wednesday, March 5, 2025, at Elsie Whitlow Stokes Community Freedom Public Charter School in Washington. Dyson and fellow crewmates Matthew Dominick, Michael Barratt, and Jeanette Epps served as part of Expedition 71 aboard the International Space Station.

Read More
#AIPrompt – In the Style of Dadaism create an image of Statue of Liberty
Read More

#AIPrompt – In the Style of Dadaism create an image of Statue of Liberty

unitedyam

Surrounding the statue, the sky is an anarchy of color, splattered with erratic brushstrokes and collaged fragments of newsprint and text in various languages, symbolizing the global dialogue on freedom. Random objects—clocks, eyes, and mechanical gears—float in this surreal ether, embodying the Dadaist rejection of logic and embracing the absurd. The juxtaposition of these elements creates a visual dissonance, a reminder that liberty is not a static symbol but a dynamic, ever-evolving concept. This polychromatic portrayal captures the Statue of Liberty not just as a beacon of freedom, but as an icon within the unpredictable and vibrant theater of human experience.

Read More