Funding

10,000 Austrian students petition to end mandatory fees funding abortions #Catholic More than 10,000 Austrian university students have signed a petition demanding that the Austrian National Union of Students (ÖH, by its German acronym) abolish its so-called “Repro Fund,” a program that uses mandatory student fees to finance abortions.The petition, organized by ProLife Europe in partnership with CitizenGo, was formally submitted on March 11 to the authorities responsible for administering the fund. Titled “No Student Funds for Killing Human Beings,” the initiative was launched after the ÖH introduced financial assistance for abortions through the Repro Fund.According to the ÖH’s published budget for the 2025-2026 academic year, 18,000 euros have been allocated to cover abortion costs, with plans outlined in the student union’s coalition agreement to expand the fund in the coming years.Petition organizers argue that the policy forces students to subsidize abortions regardless of their moral convictions.“The targeted financing of abortions is incompatible with the freedom of conscience of many students and represents an ethically absolutely indefensible decision,” the petition states.Mandatory student feesIn Austria, all university students must pay a mandatory contribution to the ÖH as part of their semester enrollment.If a student fails to pay the fee, enrollment cannot be completed. This means the student loses official student status for that semester and is barred from attending courses or taking examinations. Nonpayment also results in the loss of student accident insurance, which is normally included as part of enrollment.Because the ÖH contribution is embedded in the legal structure of university registration, students cannot opt out of supporting the organization or its programs, regardless of whether they agree with its political positions or spending decisions.Pro-life petitioners say this system effectively compels students to fund abortions through their mandatory contributions.Student mobilization exceeds expectationsMaria Czernin, president of ProLife Europe, told EWTN News that the petition’s response exceeded expectations in Austria, where public mobilization on civil issues is often limited.“For a three-month petition in Austria, this is a very strong result,” Czernin said. “People here tend to be more reserved in public campaigns, so reaching more than 10,000 signatures is significant.”Organizers initially hoped to gather around 8,000 signatures, she said, but the campaign surpassed that target before the petition closed.The ÖH, Austria’s national student union, is elected democratically by university students. As a result, the Repro Fund was introduced through decisions taken by the organization’s governing coalition.During campus outreach efforts linked to the petition, ProLife Europe volunteers spoke with students who did not identify as pro-life but nevertheless objected to the use of mandatory student fees to fund abortions.“We encountered students who were not pro-life, but they still felt that their money should not be used for this,” Czernin said. “That says a lot about how controversial this program is.”She added that the program remains relatively unknown across many Austrian universities. Organizers believe that if awareness of the funds were more widespread, opposition would grow further.A message to policymakersCzernin said the petition is also intended as a signal to Eva-Maria Holzleitner, Austrian minister for women, science, and research, whose ministry oversees higher education policy.“I hope this petition reaches Minister Holzleitner as a strong sign from students,” she said. “It shows that many students clearly stand against this cooperation and against using their mandatory contributions in this way.”Beyond the immediate funding issue, Czernin explained that abortion should not be promoted as a solution for students facing academic or financial challenges.“There is no evidence that abortion helps women finish their studies,” she said. “But there is substantial research indicating that abortion can negatively affect women’s mental health.”She added that many women have successfully completed their studies while continuing their pregnancies, explaining that support structures for student mothers would be a more constructive response to the pressures some students face.Austria’s abortion landscapeIn Austria, abortion is permitted during the first three months of pregnancy.The law does not formally declare abortion a legal right. Instead, it states that the procedure is not punishable if it is performed by a physician within the first trimester following a prior medical consultation.There is no mandatory waiting period and no requirement for counseling from an independent advisory service. The consultation requirement is limited to a discussion with a doctor before the procedure.Abortion services are generally not covered by Austria’s public health insurance system and must typically be paid for privately. Because of this, women are not required to be registered residents of Austria or enrolled in Austrian health insurance to obtain an abortion in the country.Abortions are also not subject to mandatory reporting requirements and personal information about women undergoing the procedure is not shared with authorities.
Read More

10,000 Austrian students petition to end mandatory fees funding abortions #Catholic More than 10,000 Austrian university students have signed a petition demanding that the Austrian National Union of Students (ÖH, by its German acronym) abolish its so-called “Repro Fund,” a program that uses mandatory student fees to finance abortions.The petition, organized by ProLife Europe in partnership with CitizenGo, was formally submitted on March 11 to the authorities responsible for administering the fund. Titled “No Student Funds for Killing Human Beings,” the initiative was launched after the ÖH introduced financial assistance for abortions through the Repro Fund.According to the ÖH’s published budget for the 2025-2026 academic year, 18,000 euros have been allocated to cover abortion costs, with plans outlined in the student union’s coalition agreement to expand the fund in the coming years.Petition organizers argue that the policy forces students to subsidize abortions regardless of their moral convictions.“The targeted financing of abortions is incompatible with the freedom of conscience of many students and represents an ethically absolutely indefensible decision,” the petition states.Mandatory student feesIn Austria, all university students must pay a mandatory contribution to the ÖH as part of their semester enrollment.If a student fails to pay the fee, enrollment cannot be completed. This means the student loses official student status for that semester and is barred from attending courses or taking examinations. Nonpayment also results in the loss of student accident insurance, which is normally included as part of enrollment.Because the ÖH contribution is embedded in the legal structure of university registration, students cannot opt out of supporting the organization or its programs, regardless of whether they agree with its political positions or spending decisions.Pro-life petitioners say this system effectively compels students to fund abortions through their mandatory contributions.Student mobilization exceeds expectationsMaria Czernin, president of ProLife Europe, told EWTN News that the petition’s response exceeded expectations in Austria, where public mobilization on civil issues is often limited.“For a three-month petition in Austria, this is a very strong result,” Czernin said. “People here tend to be more reserved in public campaigns, so reaching more than 10,000 signatures is significant.”Organizers initially hoped to gather around 8,000 signatures, she said, but the campaign surpassed that target before the petition closed.The ÖH, Austria’s national student union, is elected democratically by university students. As a result, the Repro Fund was introduced through decisions taken by the organization’s governing coalition.During campus outreach efforts linked to the petition, ProLife Europe volunteers spoke with students who did not identify as pro-life but nevertheless objected to the use of mandatory student fees to fund abortions.“We encountered students who were not pro-life, but they still felt that their money should not be used for this,” Czernin said. “That says a lot about how controversial this program is.”She added that the program remains relatively unknown across many Austrian universities. Organizers believe that if awareness of the funds were more widespread, opposition would grow further.A message to policymakersCzernin said the petition is also intended as a signal to Eva-Maria Holzleitner, Austrian minister for women, science, and research, whose ministry oversees higher education policy.“I hope this petition reaches Minister Holzleitner as a strong sign from students,” she said. “It shows that many students clearly stand against this cooperation and against using their mandatory contributions in this way.”Beyond the immediate funding issue, Czernin explained that abortion should not be promoted as a solution for students facing academic or financial challenges.“There is no evidence that abortion helps women finish their studies,” she said. “But there is substantial research indicating that abortion can negatively affect women’s mental health.”She added that many women have successfully completed their studies while continuing their pregnancies, explaining that support structures for student mothers would be a more constructive response to the pressures some students face.Austria’s abortion landscapeIn Austria, abortion is permitted during the first three months of pregnancy.The law does not formally declare abortion a legal right. Instead, it states that the procedure is not punishable if it is performed by a physician within the first trimester following a prior medical consultation.There is no mandatory waiting period and no requirement for counseling from an independent advisory service. The consultation requirement is limited to a discussion with a doctor before the procedure.Abortion services are generally not covered by Austria’s public health insurance system and must typically be paid for privately. Because of this, women are not required to be registered residents of Austria or enrolled in Austrian health insurance to obtain an abortion in the country.Abortions are also not subject to mandatory reporting requirements and personal information about women undergoing the procedure is not shared with authorities.

unitedyam

Pro-life students are demonstrating against the “Repro Fund,” a program that uses mandatory student fees to finance abortions.

Read More
43 Catholic Democrats pledge migrant solidarity, invoke Leo XIV, Francis #Catholic More than 40 Catholic Democrats in the House of Representatives signed onto a statement of principles regarding immigration, which urged “solidarity” with migrants and cited Catholic social teaching and the visions of Pope Francis and Pope Leo XIV to back up their positions.The statement comes as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) continues to speak out against indiscriminate mass deportations. Lawmakers are also negotiating an end to a partial government shutdown, which was spurred by debates about funding and potential reforms for immigration enforcement.“We feel called in solidarity to stand with immigrants — especially those who are poor, marginalized, or fleeing hardship — and to ensure they are treated with dignity, justice, and compassion,” the statement said.“As Catholics and elected officials, we believe that addressing long-standing inequities and expanding meaningful opportunities for immigrants is an essential part of our responsibility to community and to those most in need,” the lawmakers said.The statement was led by Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro, D-Connecticut, and signed by former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, and 41 other Catholic Democrats. No Republicans signed onto the statement.The Catholic Democrats said their position is rooted in three principles of Catholic social teaching on immigration: that people have a right to migrate to sustain their lives and the lives of their families, that nations have a right to regulate borders, and that all enforcement must be consistent with justice and mercy.In their statement, they said Jesus Christ “identifies with the migrant” when he says in Matthew 25:35: “I was … a stranger and you welcomed me.” They also cited Pope Leo XIV’s encyclical Dilexi Te, commenting on migration, in which he said the Church knows that “in every rejected migrant, it is Christ himself who knocks at the door of the community.”They quoted Pope Francis’ 2019 message for the World Day of Migrants and Refugees, in which the former pontiff said the Church’s response to immigration can be summed up in four verbs: “welcome, protect, promote, and integrate.”The statement recognizes that regulations on immigration are legitimate, citing the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which teaches that “political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions.”“Catholic social teaching approaches migration with realism: It affirms the right of persons to seek safety and opportunity while recognizing the legitimate authority of nations to regulate their borders,” they said. “Sound immigration policy is ordered, humane, and sustainable, balancing solidarity with prudence in service of human dignity and the common good.”The Catholic Democrats said, however, that border enforcement “is never a license for cruelty, indifference, or dehumanization” but instead “must be governed by justice and mercy.” They accused Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of having “failed this moral standard.”“Their actions have separated families, removed law-abiding individuals from our communities, and, tragically, contributed to the deaths of detained migrants and citizens like Renee Good and Alex Pretti,” the statement read.The Catholic Democrats, in their statement, said their position on immigration is “guided by a living Catholic tradition that affirms the dignity of every human life.” Despite the USCCB having called “the threat of abortion” its “preeminent priority” in the 2024 election, the Democratic Party supports abortion access, identifying abortion as an essential component of health care.Negotiating ICE, CBP reformsThe signatories called on Congress to “bear the Church’s teachings in mind” when considering reforms to ICE and CBP, which are being negotiated.On Feb. 14, the government entered into a partial shutdown when Congress did not reach an agreement on funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which operates both ICE and CBP.Many Democrats are proposing reforms that would restrict immigration enforcement as a condition of approving funds. Some have gone further, calling for the abolition of ICE altogether.Catholic administration officials have rejected the Democrats’ characterization that immigration enforcement has violated the human dignity of migrants.In December 2025, border czar Tom Homan told EWTN News that “we treat everybody with dignity.” He said “the most humane thing you can do is enforce the law, secure the border, because it saves lives” and asserted that the administration targets criminals and cited its work to combat fentanyl and sex trafficking.Nathaniel Madden, principal deputy assistant secretary for communications at DHS, told EWTN News in November 2025 that detainees “are going to be treated like a person, and your dignity is going to be respected.” He said dignity and immigration enforcement are compatible and “we have to take into account that laws were broken.”In January, U.S. citizens Pretti and Good were both shot and killed by federal immigration officers in separate incidents in Minneapolis.In November 2025, the USCCB issued a special message that opposed “the indiscriminate mass deportation of people” and called for an end to “dehumanizing rhetoric and violence, whether directed at immigrants or at law enforcement.” The message was approved by a vote of 216-5.
Read More

43 Catholic Democrats pledge migrant solidarity, invoke Leo XIV, Francis #Catholic More than 40 Catholic Democrats in the House of Representatives signed onto a statement of principles regarding immigration, which urged “solidarity” with migrants and cited Catholic social teaching and the visions of Pope Francis and Pope Leo XIV to back up their positions.The statement comes as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) continues to speak out against indiscriminate mass deportations. Lawmakers are also negotiating an end to a partial government shutdown, which was spurred by debates about funding and potential reforms for immigration enforcement.“We feel called in solidarity to stand with immigrants — especially those who are poor, marginalized, or fleeing hardship — and to ensure they are treated with dignity, justice, and compassion,” the statement said.“As Catholics and elected officials, we believe that addressing long-standing inequities and expanding meaningful opportunities for immigrants is an essential part of our responsibility to community and to those most in need,” the lawmakers said.The statement was led by Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro, D-Connecticut, and signed by former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, and 41 other Catholic Democrats. No Republicans signed onto the statement.The Catholic Democrats said their position is rooted in three principles of Catholic social teaching on immigration: that people have a right to migrate to sustain their lives and the lives of their families, that nations have a right to regulate borders, and that all enforcement must be consistent with justice and mercy.In their statement, they said Jesus Christ “identifies with the migrant” when he says in Matthew 25:35: “I was … a stranger and you welcomed me.” They also cited Pope Leo XIV’s encyclical Dilexi Te, commenting on migration, in which he said the Church knows that “in every rejected migrant, it is Christ himself who knocks at the door of the community.”They quoted Pope Francis’ 2019 message for the World Day of Migrants and Refugees, in which the former pontiff said the Church’s response to immigration can be summed up in four verbs: “welcome, protect, promote, and integrate.”The statement recognizes that regulations on immigration are legitimate, citing the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which teaches that “political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions.”“Catholic social teaching approaches migration with realism: It affirms the right of persons to seek safety and opportunity while recognizing the legitimate authority of nations to regulate their borders,” they said. “Sound immigration policy is ordered, humane, and sustainable, balancing solidarity with prudence in service of human dignity and the common good.”The Catholic Democrats said, however, that border enforcement “is never a license for cruelty, indifference, or dehumanization” but instead “must be governed by justice and mercy.” They accused Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of having “failed this moral standard.”“Their actions have separated families, removed law-abiding individuals from our communities, and, tragically, contributed to the deaths of detained migrants and citizens like Renee Good and Alex Pretti,” the statement read.The Catholic Democrats, in their statement, said their position on immigration is “guided by a living Catholic tradition that affirms the dignity of every human life.” Despite the USCCB having called “the threat of abortion” its “preeminent priority” in the 2024 election, the Democratic Party supports abortion access, identifying abortion as an essential component of health care.Negotiating ICE, CBP reformsThe signatories called on Congress to “bear the Church’s teachings in mind” when considering reforms to ICE and CBP, which are being negotiated.On Feb. 14, the government entered into a partial shutdown when Congress did not reach an agreement on funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which operates both ICE and CBP.Many Democrats are proposing reforms that would restrict immigration enforcement as a condition of approving funds. Some have gone further, calling for the abolition of ICE altogether.Catholic administration officials have rejected the Democrats’ characterization that immigration enforcement has violated the human dignity of migrants.In December 2025, border czar Tom Homan told EWTN News that “we treat everybody with dignity.” He said “the most humane thing you can do is enforce the law, secure the border, because it saves lives” and asserted that the administration targets criminals and cited its work to combat fentanyl and sex trafficking.Nathaniel Madden, principal deputy assistant secretary for communications at DHS, told EWTN News in November 2025 that detainees “are going to be treated like a person, and your dignity is going to be respected.” He said dignity and immigration enforcement are compatible and “we have to take into account that laws were broken.”In January, U.S. citizens Pretti and Good were both shot and killed by federal immigration officers in separate incidents in Minneapolis.In November 2025, the USCCB issued a special message that opposed “the indiscriminate mass deportation of people” and called for an end to “dehumanizing rhetoric and violence, whether directed at immigrants or at law enforcement.” The message was approved by a vote of 216-5.

unitedyam

Catholic U.S. House Democrats cited Church teaching in defense of the dignity of migrants as Trump administration officials defend immigration enforcement.

Read More
After skipping installation, New York mayor meets Archbishop Hicks #Catholic Mayor Zohran Mamdani broke a long-standing New York tradition when he missed the Feb. 6 installation Mass for Archbishop Ronald Hicks at St. Patrick’s Cathedral and met with the archbishop four days later.Joseph Zwilling, director of communications for the Archdiocese of New York, told EWTN News that “the mayor and the archbishop were together at a [New York Police Department] event” Feb. 10 and “then spoke by phone later in the day.”The archdiocese confirmed that Mamdani was invited to the installation Mass. Prior to Hicks’ installation, a sitting mayor was present for at least the past five archbishop installations, which were in 2009, 2000, 1984, 1968, and 1939. Hicks replaced Cardinal Timothy Dolan following his retirement.In Mamdani’s absence, Helen Arteaga, deputy mayor for Health and Human Services, attended the Feb. 6 installation Mass. Prior to the meeting and phone call, Mamdani congratulated Hicks on social media. “Congratulations to Archbishop Ronald Hicks on today’s installment and welcome to New York City,” Mamdani said in a post on X. “I know that Archbishop Hicks and I share a deep and abiding commitment to the dignity of every human being and look forward to working together to create a more just and compassionate city where every New Yorker can thrive.”TweetThe mayor’s press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Mamdani became the first Muslim and first democratic-socialist mayor of the city on Jan. 1.Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, a Catholic advocacy group, criticized Mamdani for missing the Mass, saying in a statement that Mamdani “ghosted the event.”“He could easily have been there,” Donohue said. “Instead, he attended to business as usual.”“One in 3 New Yorkers are Catholic, making them the largest faith community in the city,” he added. “Mamdani’s professed interest in diversity and inclusion obviously hits a brick wall when it comes to Catholics. He wants nothing to do with them.”Donohue also criticized some of Mamdani’s policy positions, which he said includes “rabid support for abortion, gay marriage, and transgenderism (including the child abuse inherent in sex-reassignment surgery for minors).”During his campaign, Mamdani vowed to increase public funding for abortion, hormone therapy drugs, and surgeries designed to make a person appear like the opposite sex.Mamdani defeated two candidates with nearly 51% of the vote in the November 2025 election. His plans include free buses, city-owned grocery stores, no-cost child care, raising the minimum wage to $30 per hour, and freezing the rent for people in rent-stabilized apartments.“Mamdani has been in office for just over a month, and already he is signaling to Catholics that they are not welcome,” Donohue said.
Read More

After skipping installation, New York mayor meets Archbishop Hicks #Catholic Mayor Zohran Mamdani broke a long-standing New York tradition when he missed the Feb. 6 installation Mass for Archbishop Ronald Hicks at St. Patrick’s Cathedral and met with the archbishop four days later.Joseph Zwilling, director of communications for the Archdiocese of New York, told EWTN News that “the mayor and the archbishop were together at a [New York Police Department] event” Feb. 10 and “then spoke by phone later in the day.”The archdiocese confirmed that Mamdani was invited to the installation Mass. Prior to Hicks’ installation, a sitting mayor was present for at least the past five archbishop installations, which were in 2009, 2000, 1984, 1968, and 1939. Hicks replaced Cardinal Timothy Dolan following his retirement.In Mamdani’s absence, Helen Arteaga, deputy mayor for Health and Human Services, attended the Feb. 6 installation Mass. Prior to the meeting and phone call, Mamdani congratulated Hicks on social media. “Congratulations to Archbishop Ronald Hicks on today’s installment and welcome to New York City,” Mamdani said in a post on X. “I know that Archbishop Hicks and I share a deep and abiding commitment to the dignity of every human being and look forward to working together to create a more just and compassionate city where every New Yorker can thrive.”TweetThe mayor’s press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Mamdani became the first Muslim and first democratic-socialist mayor of the city on Jan. 1.Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, a Catholic advocacy group, criticized Mamdani for missing the Mass, saying in a statement that Mamdani “ghosted the event.”“He could easily have been there,” Donohue said. “Instead, he attended to business as usual.”“One in 3 New Yorkers are Catholic, making them the largest faith community in the city,” he added. “Mamdani’s professed interest in diversity and inclusion obviously hits a brick wall when it comes to Catholics. He wants nothing to do with them.”Donohue also criticized some of Mamdani’s policy positions, which he said includes “rabid support for abortion, gay marriage, and transgenderism (including the child abuse inherent in sex-reassignment surgery for minors).”During his campaign, Mamdani vowed to increase public funding for abortion, hormone therapy drugs, and surgeries designed to make a person appear like the opposite sex.Mamdani defeated two candidates with nearly 51% of the vote in the November 2025 election. His plans include free buses, city-owned grocery stores, no-cost child care, raising the minimum wage to $30 per hour, and freezing the rent for people in rent-stabilized apartments.“Mamdani has been in office for just over a month, and already he is signaling to Catholics that they are not welcome,” Donohue said.

unitedyam

A sitting mayor attended the past five archbishop installations in New York dating back to 1939.

Read More
Democratic lawmaker asks ICE director if he’s ‘going to hell’ in fiery hearing #Catholic A Democratic lawmaker asked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons whether he believes he is “going to hell” in a contentious hearing with the House Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday, Feb. 10.Lyons — along with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Joseph Edlow and Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott — testified before the committee as Congress negotiates potential reforms and funding for the agencies.On Feb. 3, Congress voted to extend funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which operates the three agencies, until Feb. 13 to end a four-day partial government shutdown. A deal has not yet been reached to extend funding further.At the hearing, Democratic lawmakers accused ICE of terrorizing the streets, using excessive force, and lacking accountability. Republicans defended ICE and rebuked Democratic officials in certain states for refusing to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.One of the fiercest exchanges came from Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-New Jersey, who praised protesters for “peacefully rejecting your cruel agenda in the streets.” She said ICE believes it is “the highest power who decides which people deserve dignity, protection, and due process” and said “you are wrong [and] we are here for answers.”“How do you think judgment day will work for you, with so much blood on your hands?” McIver asked Lyons, to which he responded that he would not entertain the question.“Do you think you’re going to hell?” she followed up, before being chastised by Committee Chair Andrew Garbarino, R-New York, who told her to avoid personal attacks on witnesses and maintain decorum.McIver said “you guys are always talking about religion here, and the Bible.” She changed the subject slightly and asked Lyons whether he could name agencies that “routinely kill American citizens and still get funding,” which he also said was a question he was “not going to entertain.”“Once again, questions that you cannot answer and that is exactly why … we should not be funding this agency,” McIver said. “The people are watching you; they are watching you. And this is why we need to abolish ICE.”Lawmakers debate ICE operations, future of agencyThe killings of two American citizens at ICE protests — Renée Good and Alex Pretti — were a focal point of the hearing, and two examples that Democrats used to accuse ICE of excessive force and lacking accountability.Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-California, referenced both killings and criticized DHS Secretary Kristi Noem for referring to those who died as “domestic terrorists.” He asked Lyons whether he would apologize to the families or reject that characterization.Lyons said he would not comment on an ongoing investigation but would welcome a private conversation with the families.Democrats are split on whether to reform ICE or abolish it altogether.Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-Rhode Island, brought up instances in which he believes ICE used excessive force and suggested reforms are necessary before Congress awards funding.“It’s not just the actions of the agents in the field,” he said. “It is the lack of accountability from the top that has caused public trust to erode, and there needs to be major reforms before we vote to give any of you any more funding.”Alternatively, Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Illinois, called for abolishing ICE and the entire DHS, which Congress formed to address terrorism threats after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Ramirez said DHS was created to “violate our rights under the pretense of securing our safety.”“I’m going to say it loud and clear and I’m proud to stand by what I say,” she said. “DHS cannot be reformed. It must be dismantled and something new must take its place.”Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, commented during the hearing that Democratic lawmakers “have called to abolish ICE [and] now they’re trying to shut it down” amid the negotiations and discussion during the hearing.He criticized the lack of coordination from Democratic-led “sanctuary” states and cities, which do not cooperate with ICE, saying the policies in Minneapolis “created a perfect storm for our officers being thrown into this situation.”Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, similarly expressed concern about ICE funding moving forward, based on the debates between the two parties.“It seems like one side of the aisle is in favor of open borders and wants to abolish ICE … and the other side of the aisle wants to enforce laws that are on the books,” he said.During the question and answer, Lyons expressed worry about the rhetoric from Democrats and noted that threats and assaults against ICE agents are on the rise. He said agents are trying to “keep America safe, restore order to our communities, [and] return the rule of law to this country.”“Those who illegally enter our country must be held accountable,” he said.Scott also showed concerns about the ongoing debate and expressed hope that DHS could receive support from both Republicans and Democrats.“I believe consistency and seeing support from the leadership on both sides of this building and the president is very important for our security,” he said. “I think the rhetoric and the … politicizing of law enforcement in general detracts from the general morale of our personnel.”Andrew Arthur, a resident fellow in law and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, told “EWTN News Nightly” that he sees “much of [the Democratic threats to halt funding] as political theater,” noting that ICE will continue to operate regardless of whether Congress passes the funding bill.He said Democrats hope to take away an issue that made Trump popular during the 2024 election “and turn it into a bad issue for Republicans” in the midterms.Arthur said there may be some shifts in ICE’s approach in Minneapolis now that Border Czar Tom Homan is involved in seeking the “cooperation of state and city governments” that have been “reluctant, if not hostile” to immigration enforcement over the past year.The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in November 2025 approved a special message with a 216-5 vote that declared opposition to “the indiscriminate mass deportation of people.”Late last month, about 300 Catholic leaders — including 15 bishops — asked Congress to reject ICE funding if the legislation fails to include reforms that have protections for migrants.
Read More

Democratic lawmaker asks ICE director if he’s ‘going to hell’ in fiery hearing #Catholic A Democratic lawmaker asked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons whether he believes he is “going to hell” in a contentious hearing with the House Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday, Feb. 10.Lyons — along with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Joseph Edlow and Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott — testified before the committee as Congress negotiates potential reforms and funding for the agencies.On Feb. 3, Congress voted to extend funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which operates the three agencies, until Feb. 13 to end a four-day partial government shutdown. A deal has not yet been reached to extend funding further.At the hearing, Democratic lawmakers accused ICE of terrorizing the streets, using excessive force, and lacking accountability. Republicans defended ICE and rebuked Democratic officials in certain states for refusing to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.One of the fiercest exchanges came from Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-New Jersey, who praised protesters for “peacefully rejecting your cruel agenda in the streets.” She said ICE believes it is “the highest power who decides which people deserve dignity, protection, and due process” and said “you are wrong [and] we are here for answers.”“How do you think judgment day will work for you, with so much blood on your hands?” McIver asked Lyons, to which he responded that he would not entertain the question.“Do you think you’re going to hell?” she followed up, before being chastised by Committee Chair Andrew Garbarino, R-New York, who told her to avoid personal attacks on witnesses and maintain decorum.McIver said “you guys are always talking about religion here, and the Bible.” She changed the subject slightly and asked Lyons whether he could name agencies that “routinely kill American citizens and still get funding,” which he also said was a question he was “not going to entertain.”“Once again, questions that you cannot answer and that is exactly why … we should not be funding this agency,” McIver said. “The people are watching you; they are watching you. And this is why we need to abolish ICE.”Lawmakers debate ICE operations, future of agencyThe killings of two American citizens at ICE protests — Renée Good and Alex Pretti — were a focal point of the hearing, and two examples that Democrats used to accuse ICE of excessive force and lacking accountability.Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-California, referenced both killings and criticized DHS Secretary Kristi Noem for referring to those who died as “domestic terrorists.” He asked Lyons whether he would apologize to the families or reject that characterization.Lyons said he would not comment on an ongoing investigation but would welcome a private conversation with the families.Democrats are split on whether to reform ICE or abolish it altogether.Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-Rhode Island, brought up instances in which he believes ICE used excessive force and suggested reforms are necessary before Congress awards funding.“It’s not just the actions of the agents in the field,” he said. “It is the lack of accountability from the top that has caused public trust to erode, and there needs to be major reforms before we vote to give any of you any more funding.”Alternatively, Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Illinois, called for abolishing ICE and the entire DHS, which Congress formed to address terrorism threats after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Ramirez said DHS was created to “violate our rights under the pretense of securing our safety.”“I’m going to say it loud and clear and I’m proud to stand by what I say,” she said. “DHS cannot be reformed. It must be dismantled and something new must take its place.”Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, commented during the hearing that Democratic lawmakers “have called to abolish ICE [and] now they’re trying to shut it down” amid the negotiations and discussion during the hearing.He criticized the lack of coordination from Democratic-led “sanctuary” states and cities, which do not cooperate with ICE, saying the policies in Minneapolis “created a perfect storm for our officers being thrown into this situation.”Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, similarly expressed concern about ICE funding moving forward, based on the debates between the two parties.“It seems like one side of the aisle is in favor of open borders and wants to abolish ICE … and the other side of the aisle wants to enforce laws that are on the books,” he said.During the question and answer, Lyons expressed worry about the rhetoric from Democrats and noted that threats and assaults against ICE agents are on the rise. He said agents are trying to “keep America safe, restore order to our communities, [and] return the rule of law to this country.”“Those who illegally enter our country must be held accountable,” he said.Scott also showed concerns about the ongoing debate and expressed hope that DHS could receive support from both Republicans and Democrats.“I believe consistency and seeing support from the leadership on both sides of this building and the president is very important for our security,” he said. “I think the rhetoric and the … politicizing of law enforcement in general detracts from the general morale of our personnel.”Andrew Arthur, a resident fellow in law and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, told “EWTN News Nightly” that he sees “much of [the Democratic threats to halt funding] as political theater,” noting that ICE will continue to operate regardless of whether Congress passes the funding bill.He said Democrats hope to take away an issue that made Trump popular during the 2024 election “and turn it into a bad issue for Republicans” in the midterms.Arthur said there may be some shifts in ICE’s approach in Minneapolis now that Border Czar Tom Homan is involved in seeking the “cooperation of state and city governments” that have been “reluctant, if not hostile” to immigration enforcement over the past year.The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in November 2025 approved a special message with a 216-5 vote that declared opposition to “the indiscriminate mass deportation of people.”Late last month, about 300 Catholic leaders — including 15 bishops — asked Congress to reject ICE funding if the legislation fails to include reforms that have protections for migrants.

unitedyam

Top U.S. immigration officials defended their policies during a contentious hearing as lawmakers continue to negotiate potential ICE funding and reforms.

Read More
Catholic digital assets company about to mint its first stablecoin #Catholic On March 15, a Catholic digital assets company known as Crescite Innovation Corporation will mint its first stablecoin, called Catholic USD.Stablecoins such as Catholic USD are a type of digital asset that is backed by and will have a 1-to-1 value equivalence with the U.S. dollar (and are not to be confused with cryptocurrencies like bitcoin).Catholic USDs can be used to make purchases from or donations to Catholic organizations the same way they would with any other payment method stored in smartphone wallets.Donations and other financial transactions can take place all over the world and will be nearly instantaneous, fee-free, and secure, thanks to blockchain technology, Eddie Cullen, co-founder of Crescite, told EWTN News.With blockchain technology, which has enabled the development of unregulated cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin and regulated digital assets such as stablecoins, traditional banks are no longer required to transfer or store money because all transactions are transparent and verifiable through the blockchain, which securely links together “blocks” of digital records.“Traditional banks are like Blockbuster video, and digital assets are like the streaming services we all use today,” Cullen said.“People will no longer need traditional banks, thanks to this new technology,” he continued.Cullen and his co-founder, Karl Kilb III, started Crescite “because we love the Church,” Cullen said. “We want Catholics to be at the forefront of this new technology, and we’re using it to enable greater access to resources for people and to do good.”“The only difference between us and banks is that they take your money and leverage it to make a profit,” Cullen said. “What we’re doing is we’re taking that leverage, and we’re giving it away to Catholic institutions and causes.”“We created Crescite to be at the intersection of faith and technology, using innovation to help those in need, and society as a whole,” Kilb said. “The Catholic community is global, with numerous organizations, projects, and causes that need sustainable, transparent funding, and we are leveraging blockchain technology to build such an ecosystem.”When a person buys Catholic USD, Crescite will invest that money in vehicles including U.S. Treasury bonds and will put 100% of that yield into a charity fund known as the Catholic Global Mercy Trust.The trust will fund Catholic poverty relief efforts, hospitals, schools, and other causes all over the world.“When we look at our work, it’s really a Catholic digital asset ecosystem,” Cullen said. “We have our stablecoin, and we are going to build upon that.”The money Crescite takes in through the sale of Catholic USD will be custodied, or held, in a digital wallet by a financial technology company known as BitGo, which in January completed its initial public offering (IPO) and began trading on the New York Stock Exchange. It is also chartered under U.S. law and authorized by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. BitGo is “the platform that’s issuing the stablecoin,” Cullen said. It and Crescite will have no intermingled investments.The funds Crescite holds are also insured.“Crescite” means to increase or grow in Latin. Cullen said he and Kilb, who co-own the company and founded it together in 2021, chose the name after reflecting on the effects of God’s touch on man-made things, as portrayed in the image of God’s hand touching Adam’s in Michaelangelo’s famous painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.Cullen said the name also refers to Genesis 1:28, when God tells Adam to “Be fruitful (increase) and multiply.”Bitcoin, the first cryptocurrencyThe first cryptocurrency, which is very different from the stablecoin Crescite is issuing, was bitcoin, which came out in 2009 and whose inventor or inventors, known as Satoshi Nakamoto, is/are still unknown.Bitcoin emerged as “pushback” to the 2008 financial crisis, according to The Catholic University of America Busch School of Business Professor Kevin May, who told EWTN News that consumers wanted something more “sound and reliable” than our current financial system after the crisis.Bitcoin is decentralized and is the only true “open source” cryptocurrency, according to May.Bitcoin’s inventors no longer had “trust in the current financial system,” where “the banks and bankers took bets; when they were right they privatized all the gains, and when they were wrong, they got bailed out and rebought their own shares,” May said. “Hardly any of them got in trouble” while the financial markets and consumers paid for their actions.The value of bitcoin has gone from several pennies at its initial launch to a high of 6,000 in October 2025. Currently, one bitcoin is valued at about ,000.Exchanges now exist where people can buy and sell bitcoin. There are even bitcoin-linked credit cards.Bitcoin, however, is a true cryptocurrency in that it is not insured or backed by any currency, and it is not regulated by the federal government, meaning it could collapse at any moment and investors could lose their money.A benefit of a cryptocurrency like bitcoin, according to May, is that it can “bank the unbanked, especially in societies where you cannot trust the leadership.”He used the example of a coffee farmer in Uganda who could trade in bitcoin and essentially have “his own bank on his cellphone,” without having to deal with a corrupt or inefficient system.The difference between ‘cryptocurrency’ and ‘digital assets’Digital assets like Catholic USD and cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin are alternatives to traditional financial institutions and government-backed currency made possible by blockchain technology.However, the terms “digital assets” and “cryptocurrency” mean different things: Digital assets refer to stablecoins as well as tokenized securities, commodities, and other digital representations of real-world assets that do not imply the unregulated, speculative trading or volatility inherent with bitcoin.Cullen explained that this is a major difference between bitcoin and stablecoins such as Catholic USD, which is actually backed by the U.S. dollar and will be regulated by the recently passed GENIUS Act, which is expected to increase the growth of and trust in stablecoins through clear regulatory rules.Other existing stablecoins include USD1, which, like Catholic USD, is also a U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoin (designed to maintain a 1-to-1 value with the U.S. dollar).USD1 was launched in March 2025 by World Liberty Financial, a decentralized finance (DeFi) platform and cryptocurrency venture closely associated with President Donald Trump and his family, though disclaimers emphasize that the Trump family are not officers or directors and that the cryptocurrency is not politically affiliated or endorsed.A company called Tether Unlimited issued a stablecoin, USDT, which is the longest-running and largest U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoin, launched in 2014 and with a market cap around 4 billion (as of early 2026). It holds roughly 60%-70% of the total stablecoin market share with 534 million users as of early this year.The GENIUS ActPassed with bipartisan support and signed into law by Trump in July 2025, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act establishes a clear, regulatory framework that legitimizes payment stablecoins and digital asset infrastructure.It aims to preserve U.S. dollar leadership globally while allowing responsible private-sector innovation under defined guardrails.Under the act, qualified nonbank entities may issue payment stablecoins under federal or state supervision, while banks and affiliates may also participate. This dual pathway is intended to foster competition, reduce concentration risk, and avoid stifling innovation.Critics note the GENIUS Act does not fully address illicit finance risks in decentralized systems such as bitcoin, however.
Read More

Catholic digital assets company about to mint its first stablecoin #Catholic On March 15, a Catholic digital assets company known as Crescite Innovation Corporation will mint its first stablecoin, called Catholic USD.Stablecoins such as Catholic USD are a type of digital asset that is backed by and will have a 1-to-1 value equivalence with the U.S. dollar (and are not to be confused with cryptocurrencies like bitcoin).Catholic USDs can be used to make purchases from or donations to Catholic organizations the same way they would with any other payment method stored in smartphone wallets.Donations and other financial transactions can take place all over the world and will be nearly instantaneous, fee-free, and secure, thanks to blockchain technology, Eddie Cullen, co-founder of Crescite, told EWTN News.With blockchain technology, which has enabled the development of unregulated cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin and regulated digital assets such as stablecoins, traditional banks are no longer required to transfer or store money because all transactions are transparent and verifiable through the blockchain, which securely links together “blocks” of digital records.“Traditional banks are like Blockbuster video, and digital assets are like the streaming services we all use today,” Cullen said.“People will no longer need traditional banks, thanks to this new technology,” he continued.Cullen and his co-founder, Karl Kilb III, started Crescite “because we love the Church,” Cullen said. “We want Catholics to be at the forefront of this new technology, and we’re using it to enable greater access to resources for people and to do good.”“The only difference between us and banks is that they take your money and leverage it to make a profit,” Cullen said. “What we’re doing is we’re taking that leverage, and we’re giving it away to Catholic institutions and causes.”“We created Crescite to be at the intersection of faith and technology, using innovation to help those in need, and society as a whole,” Kilb said. “The Catholic community is global, with numerous organizations, projects, and causes that need sustainable, transparent funding, and we are leveraging blockchain technology to build such an ecosystem.”When a person buys Catholic USD, Crescite will invest that money in vehicles including U.S. Treasury bonds and will put 100% of that yield into a charity fund known as the Catholic Global Mercy Trust.The trust will fund Catholic poverty relief efforts, hospitals, schools, and other causes all over the world.“When we look at our work, it’s really a Catholic digital asset ecosystem,” Cullen said. “We have our stablecoin, and we are going to build upon that.”The money Crescite takes in through the sale of Catholic USD will be custodied, or held, in a digital wallet by a financial technology company known as BitGo, which in January completed its initial public offering (IPO) and began trading on the New York Stock Exchange. It is also chartered under U.S. law and authorized by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. BitGo is “the platform that’s issuing the stablecoin,” Cullen said. It and Crescite will have no intermingled investments.The funds Crescite holds are also insured.“Crescite” means to increase or grow in Latin. Cullen said he and Kilb, who co-own the company and founded it together in 2021, chose the name after reflecting on the effects of God’s touch on man-made things, as portrayed in the image of God’s hand touching Adam’s in Michaelangelo’s famous painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.Cullen said the name also refers to Genesis 1:28, when God tells Adam to “Be fruitful (increase) and multiply.”Bitcoin, the first cryptocurrencyThe first cryptocurrency, which is very different from the stablecoin Crescite is issuing, was bitcoin, which came out in 2009 and whose inventor or inventors, known as Satoshi Nakamoto, is/are still unknown.Bitcoin emerged as “pushback” to the 2008 financial crisis, according to The Catholic University of America Busch School of Business Professor Kevin May, who told EWTN News that consumers wanted something more “sound and reliable” than our current financial system after the crisis.Bitcoin is decentralized and is the only true “open source” cryptocurrency, according to May.Bitcoin’s inventors no longer had “trust in the current financial system,” where “the banks and bankers took bets; when they were right they privatized all the gains, and when they were wrong, they got bailed out and rebought their own shares,” May said. “Hardly any of them got in trouble” while the financial markets and consumers paid for their actions.The value of bitcoin has gone from several pennies at its initial launch to a high of $126,000 in October 2025. Currently, one bitcoin is valued at about $70,000.Exchanges now exist where people can buy and sell bitcoin. There are even bitcoin-linked credit cards.Bitcoin, however, is a true cryptocurrency in that it is not insured or backed by any currency, and it is not regulated by the federal government, meaning it could collapse at any moment and investors could lose their money.A benefit of a cryptocurrency like bitcoin, according to May, is that it can “bank the unbanked, especially in societies where you cannot trust the leadership.”He used the example of a coffee farmer in Uganda who could trade in bitcoin and essentially have “his own bank on his cellphone,” without having to deal with a corrupt or inefficient system.The difference between ‘cryptocurrency’ and ‘digital assets’Digital assets like Catholic USD and cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin are alternatives to traditional financial institutions and government-backed currency made possible by blockchain technology.However, the terms “digital assets” and “cryptocurrency” mean different things: Digital assets refer to stablecoins as well as tokenized securities, commodities, and other digital representations of real-world assets that do not imply the unregulated, speculative trading or volatility inherent with bitcoin.Cullen explained that this is a major difference between bitcoin and stablecoins such as Catholic USD, which is actually backed by the U.S. dollar and will be regulated by the recently passed GENIUS Act, which is expected to increase the growth of and trust in stablecoins through clear regulatory rules.Other existing stablecoins include USD1, which, like Catholic USD, is also a U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoin (designed to maintain a 1-to-1 value with the U.S. dollar).USD1 was launched in March 2025 by World Liberty Financial, a decentralized finance (DeFi) platform and cryptocurrency venture closely associated with President Donald Trump and his family, though disclaimers emphasize that the Trump family are not officers or directors and that the cryptocurrency is not politically affiliated or endorsed.A company called Tether Unlimited issued a stablecoin, USDT, which is the longest-running and largest U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoin, launched in 2014 and with a market cap around $184 billion (as of early 2026). It holds roughly 60%-70% of the total stablecoin market share with 534 million users as of early this year.The GENIUS ActPassed with bipartisan support and signed into law by Trump in July 2025, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act establishes a clear, regulatory framework that legitimizes payment stablecoins and digital asset infrastructure.It aims to preserve U.S. dollar leadership globally while allowing responsible private-sector innovation under defined guardrails.Under the act, qualified nonbank entities may issue payment stablecoins under federal or state supervision, while banks and affiliates may also participate. This dual pathway is intended to foster competition, reduce concentration risk, and avoid stifling innovation.Critics note the GENIUS Act does not fully address illicit finance risks in decentralized systems such as bitcoin, however.

unitedyam

Catholic entrepreneurs Eddie Cullen and Karl Kilb want to use new financial technologies to benefit the Catholic Church and its charitable work.

Read More