Healthcare

Abortion count rises as women turn to chemical abortions, per new data #Catholic The U.S. abortion count continues to rise even as travel abortions decrease, a recent study found.The Guttmacher Institute, a data group that openly supports abortion access, documented a decrease in people leaving their own state to get abortions in other states. Instead, abortion seekers turn toward mail-order abortions, which have seen a surge in recent years.The group tracks abortions monthly, following trends “in the post-Dobbs era” since 2023, according to Guttmacher data scientist and study lead Isaac Maddow-Zimet. The data indicated an overall increase in abortions from 2025 to 2026. “In the first three months of 2026, there were 296,130 abortions as compared to 292,590 in the first three months of 2025,” data scholar Michael New told EWTN News. “This is an increase of just over 1%.”New said this fact has gone underreported.“Most media outlets that are reporting on the Guttmacher data have not reported on this, but the number of abortions continues to rise,” said New, who is a senior associate scholar at Charlotte Lozier Institute, a group that studies data relating to the pro-life cause.“These rising abortion numbers are an important reason why pro-lifers are frustrated with the Trump administration’s lack of action on telehealth abortions,” continued New, who also works as a professor at the Busch School of Business at The Catholic University of America.The Trump administration has neglected to enforce various regulations — such as the Comstock Act or in-person prescription requirements — that could be groundbreaking for protecting unborn children from chemical abortions.From 2024 to 2025, travel abortions declined by nearly 8%. Scholars agree that mail-order abortion is the reason for the decline in abortion travel.“Currently, we are seeing a major shift in where and how people access abortion,” Maddow-Zimet said. “While travel remains a critical pathway to care, we have seen a decrease in people leaving their state of residence, likely due to both the growth of telehealth access and fewer options for in-person care in the South and Southeast.”New also cited chemical abortions as the draw away from travel abortions. “The main reason for this decline in out-of-state travel is because of the rising number of telehealth abortions,” New said. “The most recent data from the Society for Family Planning shows that approximately 27% of all abortions are done by telehealth.”In Florida, the study also found a near tripling of abortion travel by Floridians after the state passed a heartbeat law to protect unborn babies; at the same time, fewer people traveled to Florida to obtain abortions due to this law.“The national decline [in travel abortions] might have been even larger had Florida not started enforcing a Heartbeat Act in 2024,” New said. “Because of this strong pro-life law, far fewer women residing in southern states traveled to Florida for abortions.”Texas has also seen a decline in Texans traveling to get abortions.  “This trend is seen at the state level,” New continued. “Between 2024 and 2025 the number of Texas women obtaining abortions in other states fell by 19%.”Mail-order abortion is pro-life priorityAdvocates for unborn children highlighted the importance of opposing chemical abortions and protecting unborn children across state lines. Abortion continues to rise with the increase in mail-order abortions.Kelsey Pritchard, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America spokeswoman, called for protections of unborn children across state lines.“We need a national minimum standard to ensure children across America have basic human rights and the chance at life, regardless of their zip code,” Pritchard told EWTN News.“Nine states and the District of Columbia still have no gestational limits whatsoever on abortion, allowing abortion up to the moment of birth, with late-term abortion centers purposely located within range of pro-life state borders,” Pritchard said. “This is barbaric and extreme, and it places the United States in the same category as communist countries like China and Vietnam on abortion.”“While stopping the ‘Wild West’ of unregulated abortion by mail is our immediate priority, both issues underscore the urgent need for national action to protect unborn children and their mothers,” Pritchard said. “Abortion travel is down overall, but mail-order abortions are surging and driving the national total up to an estimated 1.1 million abortions per year — more than the day Roe was reversed,” Pritchard said. “Every single month, approximately 15,000 babies in the womb die from mail-order abortion drugs in states with pro-life laws, while women and girls are poisoned and coerced by abusers who obtain these drugs online without so much as an ID check.”Kristi Hamrick, Students for Life spokeswoman, questioned the data, noting that there is no reporting requirement for abortion.“I find it extraordinary that the abortion industry reports so much data that is accepted as gospel, despite the fact that we canʼt verify it,” Hamrick said. “We have no national abortion reporting law, and while this data will be broadly reported, every point of data from pro-life sources is treated as suspect.”Guttmacher collects monthly data from brick-and-mortar facilities and telehealth providers, according to the study methodology.The nature of mail-order abortion pills makes it harder to accurately track the number of the abortions in the U.S. as the pills are highly unregulated and some companies operate outside of the U.S. healthcare system.“The landscape of abortion is shifting, from brick-and-mortar abortion vendor to online pill pushers, so less driving, if that is true, does not mean less abortion,” Hamrick said.For Students for Life, “fighting chemical abortion pills” is a priority.Through pregnancy help centers, maternity homes, and other programs, the pro-life movement continues to encourage women to choose life.“But what is happening in real time is that many are reaching out to women online and in their communities to encourage and support them in choosing life, while we also have to confront a new abortion cartel,” Hamrick said.
Read More

Abortion count rises as women turn to chemical abortions, per new data #Catholic The U.S. abortion count continues to rise even as travel abortions decrease, a recent study found.The Guttmacher Institute, a data group that openly supports abortion access, documented a decrease in people leaving their own state to get abortions in other states. Instead, abortion seekers turn toward mail-order abortions, which have seen a surge in recent years.The group tracks abortions monthly, following trends “in the post-Dobbs era” since 2023, according to Guttmacher data scientist and study lead Isaac Maddow-Zimet. The data indicated an overall increase in abortions from 2025 to 2026. “In the first three months of 2026, there were 296,130 abortions as compared to 292,590 in the first three months of 2025,” data scholar Michael New told EWTN News. “This is an increase of just over 1%.”New said this fact has gone underreported.“Most media outlets that are reporting on the Guttmacher data have not reported on this, but the number of abortions continues to rise,” said New, who is a senior associate scholar at Charlotte Lozier Institute, a group that studies data relating to the pro-life cause.“These rising abortion numbers are an important reason why pro-lifers are frustrated with the Trump administration’s lack of action on telehealth abortions,” continued New, who also works as a professor at the Busch School of Business at The Catholic University of America.The Trump administration has neglected to enforce various regulations — such as the Comstock Act or in-person prescription requirements — that could be groundbreaking for protecting unborn children from chemical abortions.From 2024 to 2025, travel abortions declined by nearly 8%. Scholars agree that mail-order abortion is the reason for the decline in abortion travel.“Currently, we are seeing a major shift in where and how people access abortion,” Maddow-Zimet said. “While travel remains a critical pathway to care, we have seen a decrease in people leaving their state of residence, likely due to both the growth of telehealth access and fewer options for in-person care in the South and Southeast.”New also cited chemical abortions as the draw away from travel abortions. “The main reason for this decline in out-of-state travel is because of the rising number of telehealth abortions,” New said. “The most recent data from the Society for Family Planning shows that approximately 27% of all abortions are done by telehealth.”In Florida, the study also found a near tripling of abortion travel by Floridians after the state passed a heartbeat law to protect unborn babies; at the same time, fewer people traveled to Florida to obtain abortions due to this law.“The national decline [in travel abortions] might have been even larger had Florida not started enforcing a Heartbeat Act in 2024,” New said. “Because of this strong pro-life law, far fewer women residing in southern states traveled to Florida for abortions.”Texas has also seen a decline in Texans traveling to get abortions.  “This trend is seen at the state level,” New continued. “Between 2024 and 2025 the number of Texas women obtaining abortions in other states fell by 19%.”Mail-order abortion is pro-life priorityAdvocates for unborn children highlighted the importance of opposing chemical abortions and protecting unborn children across state lines. Abortion continues to rise with the increase in mail-order abortions.Kelsey Pritchard, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America spokeswoman, called for protections of unborn children across state lines.“We need a national minimum standard to ensure children across America have basic human rights and the chance at life, regardless of their zip code,” Pritchard told EWTN News.“Nine states and the District of Columbia still have no gestational limits whatsoever on abortion, allowing abortion up to the moment of birth, with late-term abortion centers purposely located within range of pro-life state borders,” Pritchard said. “This is barbaric and extreme, and it places the United States in the same category as communist countries like China and Vietnam on abortion.”“While stopping the ‘Wild West’ of unregulated abortion by mail is our immediate priority, both issues underscore the urgent need for national action to protect unborn children and their mothers,” Pritchard said. “Abortion travel is down overall, but mail-order abortions are surging and driving the national total up to an estimated 1.1 million abortions per year — more than the day Roe was reversed,” Pritchard said. “Every single month, approximately 15,000 babies in the womb die from mail-order abortion drugs in states with pro-life laws, while women and girls are poisoned and coerced by abusers who obtain these drugs online without so much as an ID check.”Kristi Hamrick, Students for Life spokeswoman, questioned the data, noting that there is no reporting requirement for abortion.“I find it extraordinary that the abortion industry reports so much data that is accepted as gospel, despite the fact that we canʼt verify it,” Hamrick said. “We have no national abortion reporting law, and while this data will be broadly reported, every point of data from pro-life sources is treated as suspect.”Guttmacher collects monthly data from brick-and-mortar facilities and telehealth providers, according to the study methodology.The nature of mail-order abortion pills makes it harder to accurately track the number of the abortions in the U.S. as the pills are highly unregulated and some companies operate outside of the U.S. healthcare system.“The landscape of abortion is shifting, from brick-and-mortar abortion vendor to online pill pushers, so less driving, if that is true, does not mean less abortion,” Hamrick said.For Students for Life, “fighting chemical abortion pills” is a priority.Through pregnancy help centers, maternity homes, and other programs, the pro-life movement continues to encourage women to choose life.“But what is happening in real time is that many are reaching out to women online and in their communities to encourage and support them in choosing life, while we also have to confront a new abortion cartel,” Hamrick said.

unitedyam

The abortion count is rising as women rely more on mail-order chemical abortions, according to the most recent data.

Read More
Haiti plunged into deepening violence as drone fatalities, gang activity increase #Catholic Escalating gang violence and a 120% increase in drone attacks have driven Haiti deeper into what aid officials describe as a rapidly deteriorating situation, placing the country among the top five on the International Rescue Committeeʼs 2026 emergency watch list.“Haiti is in the grip of an overwhelming humanitarian crisis,” Ciarán Donnelly, senior vice president for crisis response, recovery, and development at the International Rescue Committee, told “EWTN News Nightly” on July 15.According to Donnelly, more than 1,200 civilians are estimated to have been killed in drone attacks in Haiti this year, including 17 children.“This is one of the most concerning aspects of the humanitarian situation in Haiti and of the trends that weʼve seen over recent months,” he said.Donnelly described the drones as “small, cheap, easier-to-operate quadcopter-type drones which are fitted with explosives and then used essentially as improvised explosive devices, some of which have exploded in public areas with children around or people who are out shopping, leading to a number of fatalities.”“The situation is particularly acute in the capital, Port-au-Prince, which is in the grip of gang-fueled violence, with gangs controlling about 90% of the total territory of the capital city,” he said.In addition, Donnelly said Haitians face limited access to healthcare, and about half of the country’s population of around 6.4 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance.“Our team on the ground, working very closely with Haitian civil society organizations, is focused on providing healthcare support, supporting primary healthcare, and, in particular, services for women and children and water and sanitation,” he said. “The risk of communicable diseases, given the displacement and the underfunding of public services in Haiti, is quite significant, as well as protection services for women and children who are particularly at risk of violence given the given the situation on the ground.”Donnelly’s remarks come as Haiti has climbed from ninth place in 2023 to fifth place in 2026 on the International Rescue Committee’s annual emergency watch list, which ranks the top 20 countries facing the world’s most severe humanitarian crises. No. 1 on the list is Sudan.
Read More

Haiti plunged into deepening violence as drone fatalities, gang activity increase #Catholic Escalating gang violence and a 120% increase in drone attacks have driven Haiti deeper into what aid officials describe as a rapidly deteriorating situation, placing the country among the top five on the International Rescue Committeeʼs 2026 emergency watch list.“Haiti is in the grip of an overwhelming humanitarian crisis,” Ciarán Donnelly, senior vice president for crisis response, recovery, and development at the International Rescue Committee, told “EWTN News Nightly” on July 15.According to Donnelly, more than 1,200 civilians are estimated to have been killed in drone attacks in Haiti this year, including 17 children.“This is one of the most concerning aspects of the humanitarian situation in Haiti and of the trends that weʼve seen over recent months,” he said.Donnelly described the drones as “small, cheap, easier-to-operate quadcopter-type drones which are fitted with explosives and then used essentially as improvised explosive devices, some of which have exploded in public areas with children around or people who are out shopping, leading to a number of fatalities.”“The situation is particularly acute in the capital, Port-au-Prince, which is in the grip of gang-fueled violence, with gangs controlling about 90% of the total territory of the capital city,” he said.In addition, Donnelly said Haitians face limited access to healthcare, and about half of the country’s population of around 6.4 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance.“Our team on the ground, working very closely with Haitian civil society organizations, is focused on providing healthcare support, supporting primary healthcare, and, in particular, services for women and children and water and sanitation,” he said. “The risk of communicable diseases, given the displacement and the underfunding of public services in Haiti, is quite significant, as well as protection services for women and children who are particularly at risk of violence given the given the situation on the ground.”Donnelly’s remarks come as Haiti has climbed from ninth place in 2023 to fifth place in 2026 on the International Rescue Committee’s annual emergency watch list, which ranks the top 20 countries facing the world’s most severe humanitarian crises. No. 1 on the list is Sudan.

unitedyam

Haiti climbed to No. 5 on the International Rescue Committee’s 2026 emergency watch list, which ranks the top 20 countries facing the world’s most severe humanitarian crises.

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

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

unitedyam

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

Read More
Little Sisters argue contraception mandate case before 3rd Circuit as long fight continues #Catholic Legal counsel for the Little Sisters of the Poor delivered oral arguments to a federal appellate court on July 7 as the Catholic religious society continued its 15-year legal battle over contraception mandates.The dispute goes back to a 2011 federal regulation imposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which requires employers to include coverage of contraception in healthcare plans offered to employees, as part of rules implementing the Affordable Care Act.Although the Little Sisters of the Poor already won two Supreme Court cases — which found the federal government must protect the religious freedom of those who object to contraception and that the federal government has the authority to create exemptions — the attorneys general of Pennsylvania and New Jersey are challenging federal exemptions on grounds that the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on.A lower court ruled in favor of the two states, against the Little Sisters of the Poor, finding that the federal exemptions are arbitrary and capricious. The sisters filed an appeal, which is being considered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.Aimee Thomson, who represented the two states, argued that the broad exemptions — which allow both religious and moral objectors to avoid the mandate — are “arbitrary and capricious” and that the exemptions “swept well beyond all religious employers” who first objected to the mandate.Under the rule, employers who have moral or religious objections can opt in to an accommodation in which the federal government subsidizes contraception coverage in their plans. Employers who also have moral or religious objections to the accommodation can sidestep contraception coverage altogether.She told the panel of judges that the exemption exceeds the scope that is required under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). She said the regulators failed to show that these exemptions were necessary to solve the religious liberty issue and expressed concerns over employers potentially getting exemptions even though their objections are not sincere.Thomson said it’s unclear “how many women have been impacted” by insincere objections, but “expecting female employees” to study policies and litigate an employer’s insincere objections is burdensome.“That is an incredible burden to place on employees and on women,” she said.Mark Rienzi, president of Becket and lead attorney for the Little Sisters, argued that the federal government sought to “choose a middle ground” that created a mandate but protected religious freedom, based on Supreme Court guidance: “Nothing about that is even close to arbitrary and capricious.”“This law is about the federal government … accommodating religion with its own mandate,” he said.Rienzi said a rule does not become arbitrary and capricious just because the scope is “a hair more than what’s required” under RFRA.The Little Sisters of the Poor are also receiving support from the Department of Justice. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Eric McArthur argued on behalf of the federal government, in favor of the exemptions, saying RFRA does not require the exemptions to be the “bare minimum.”He said HHS chose to “set everything aside and take a fresh look at everything” and decided “an exemption was the most appropriate administrative response” to objections. He said this was adopted “as a policy matter … even if RFRA does not compel it.”McArthur argued there is “no good reason” for someone to insincerely request an exemption because the employer can request the accommodation “at zero cost.” Yet, if the court decides the exemptions are too broad, the court could strike down “one line in the rule” rather than “take down the entire rule,” as the two states have requested.Mother Loraine Marie Maguire of the Little Sisters of the Poor said in a statement after the oral arguments that the states’ lawsuit to eliminate the exemptions is threatening their mission to serve the poor and the elderly.“This is our God-given mission,” she said “For nearly 200 years we have welcomed the elderly poor and dying into our homes, and with the population of seniors rapidly growing we cannot allow a government lawsuit to stop us from carrying out our mission. Pennsylvania and New Jersey can keep fighting if they want. All we want is to keep serving.”
Read More

Little Sisters argue contraception mandate case before 3rd Circuit as long fight continues #Catholic Legal counsel for the Little Sisters of the Poor delivered oral arguments to a federal appellate court on July 7 as the Catholic religious society continued its 15-year legal battle over contraception mandates.The dispute goes back to a 2011 federal regulation imposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which requires employers to include coverage of contraception in healthcare plans offered to employees, as part of rules implementing the Affordable Care Act.Although the Little Sisters of the Poor already won two Supreme Court cases — which found the federal government must protect the religious freedom of those who object to contraception and that the federal government has the authority to create exemptions — the attorneys general of Pennsylvania and New Jersey are challenging federal exemptions on grounds that the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on.A lower court ruled in favor of the two states, against the Little Sisters of the Poor, finding that the federal exemptions are arbitrary and capricious. The sisters filed an appeal, which is being considered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.Aimee Thomson, who represented the two states, argued that the broad exemptions — which allow both religious and moral objectors to avoid the mandate — are “arbitrary and capricious” and that the exemptions “swept well beyond all religious employers” who first objected to the mandate.Under the rule, employers who have moral or religious objections can opt in to an accommodation in which the federal government subsidizes contraception coverage in their plans. Employers who also have moral or religious objections to the accommodation can sidestep contraception coverage altogether.She told the panel of judges that the exemption exceeds the scope that is required under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). She said the regulators failed to show that these exemptions were necessary to solve the religious liberty issue and expressed concerns over employers potentially getting exemptions even though their objections are not sincere.Thomson said it’s unclear “how many women have been impacted” by insincere objections, but “expecting female employees” to study policies and litigate an employer’s insincere objections is burdensome.“That is an incredible burden to place on employees and on women,” she said.Mark Rienzi, president of Becket and lead attorney for the Little Sisters, argued that the federal government sought to “choose a middle ground” that created a mandate but protected religious freedom, based on Supreme Court guidance: “Nothing about that is even close to arbitrary and capricious.”“This law is about the federal government … accommodating religion with its own mandate,” he said.Rienzi said a rule does not become arbitrary and capricious just because the scope is “a hair more than what’s required” under RFRA.The Little Sisters of the Poor are also receiving support from the Department of Justice. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Eric McArthur argued on behalf of the federal government, in favor of the exemptions, saying RFRA does not require the exemptions to be the “bare minimum.”He said HHS chose to “set everything aside and take a fresh look at everything” and decided “an exemption was the most appropriate administrative response” to objections. He said this was adopted “as a policy matter … even if RFRA does not compel it.”McArthur argued there is “no good reason” for someone to insincerely request an exemption because the employer can request the accommodation “at zero cost.” Yet, if the court decides the exemptions are too broad, the court could strike down “one line in the rule” rather than “take down the entire rule,” as the two states have requested.Mother Loraine Marie Maguire of the Little Sisters of the Poor said in a statement after the oral arguments that the states’ lawsuit to eliminate the exemptions is threatening their mission to serve the poor and the elderly.“This is our God-given mission,” she said “For nearly 200 years we have welcomed the elderly poor and dying into our homes, and with the population of seniors rapidly growing we cannot allow a government lawsuit to stop us from carrying out our mission. Pennsylvania and New Jersey can keep fighting if they want. All we want is to keep serving.”

unitedyam

The dispute stems from a 2011 federal rule requiring employers to include contraception coverage in employee health plans under the Affordable Care Act.

Read More
Court ruling leaves Haitian migrants’ future uncertain as Archbishop Wenski urges Senate action #Catholic The future of hundreds of thousands of Haitian and Syrian migrants living legally in the United States remains uncertain after the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to move forward with changes to temporary protected status (TPS), shifting the issue back to Congress.In response to the decision, Archbishop Thomas Wenski of Miami called on Congress to protect TPS holders, arguing that ending the humanitarian program would have serious consequences for migrants, their families, and communities across the country.In an interview with Veronica Dudo of “EWTN News Nightly” on June 26, Wenski said the court’s ruling was “not unexpected,” adding that the justices ultimately returned the issue to lawmakers.“The decision was not unexpected, because a conservative court doesn’t want to rule from the bench, as it were. And so what has been done is kick the ball back into the Congress, which is the body of the government that is supposed to be making the laws,” he said.Push for Senate voteThe Miami archbishop said the U.S. Senate should send the president legislation passed in the House that would extend TPS protections for Haitians for three additional years. In April, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the legislation, H.R. 1689, that would extend TPS for Haitians until 2029. Senate consideration is next.“We’re asking the senators of the United States to approve that proposition, so that it could be passed into law,” he said, and he also urged its passage in a column for the Archdiocese of Miami. TPS allows nationals from countries experiencing armed conflict, natural disasters, or other extraordinary conditions to remain and work legally in the United States temporarily. Haiti was first designated for TPS following the devastating 2010 earthquake.Wenski warned that ending those protections could have severe humanitarian consequences.“Haiti could be described very correctly as a house on fire,” he said. “It would be hard to see how you could send back 350,000 people, many of whom have been here since the earthquake of 2010, and have built lives here in this country … and it’s unconscionable to think that that could be done without creating a tremendous humanitarian disaster.”The archbishop also highlighted the economic role many Haitian immigrants play, particularly in healthcare.“The Haitians are working; they’re not on the public dole. They’re not public charges. They’re working, and many of them are working in the healthcare sector,” he said.Within the Archdiocese of Miami, he said, many TPS holders serve in Catholic nursing homes and other healthcare ministries.“To have their work permits revoked and taken away from them would have not only a terrible effect on them, but it would have an economic impact on the entire community,” he said.The archdiocese is also preparing to assist migrants facing legal uncertainty.“The Archdiocese of Miami has Catholic Legal Services … we’re trying to accompany them and to see if there are any other pathways or solutions,” he said.Even so, Wenski emphasized that lasting immigration reform must come from Congress.“The ball is in the court of the Senate.”
Read More

Court ruling leaves Haitian migrants’ future uncertain as Archbishop Wenski urges Senate action #Catholic The future of hundreds of thousands of Haitian and Syrian migrants living legally in the United States remains uncertain after the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to move forward with changes to temporary protected status (TPS), shifting the issue back to Congress.In response to the decision, Archbishop Thomas Wenski of Miami called on Congress to protect TPS holders, arguing that ending the humanitarian program would have serious consequences for migrants, their families, and communities across the country.In an interview with Veronica Dudo of “EWTN News Nightly” on June 26, Wenski said the court’s ruling was “not unexpected,” adding that the justices ultimately returned the issue to lawmakers.“The decision was not unexpected, because a conservative court doesn’t want to rule from the bench, as it were. And so what has been done is kick the ball back into the Congress, which is the body of the government that is supposed to be making the laws,” he said.Push for Senate voteThe Miami archbishop said the U.S. Senate should send the president legislation passed in the House that would extend TPS protections for Haitians for three additional years. In April, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the legislation, H.R. 1689, that would extend TPS for Haitians until 2029. Senate consideration is next.“We’re asking the senators of the United States to approve that proposition, so that it could be passed into law,” he said, and he also urged its passage in a column for the Archdiocese of Miami. TPS allows nationals from countries experiencing armed conflict, natural disasters, or other extraordinary conditions to remain and work legally in the United States temporarily. Haiti was first designated for TPS following the devastating 2010 earthquake.Wenski warned that ending those protections could have severe humanitarian consequences.“Haiti could be described very correctly as a house on fire,” he said. “It would be hard to see how you could send back 350,000 people, many of whom have been here since the earthquake of 2010, and have built lives here in this country … and it’s unconscionable to think that that could be done without creating a tremendous humanitarian disaster.”The archbishop also highlighted the economic role many Haitian immigrants play, particularly in healthcare.“The Haitians are working; they’re not on the public dole. They’re not public charges. They’re working, and many of them are working in the healthcare sector,” he said.Within the Archdiocese of Miami, he said, many TPS holders serve in Catholic nursing homes and other healthcare ministries.“To have their work permits revoked and taken away from them would have not only a terrible effect on them, but it would have an economic impact on the entire community,” he said.The archdiocese is also preparing to assist migrants facing legal uncertainty.“The Archdiocese of Miami has Catholic Legal Services … we’re trying to accompany them and to see if there are any other pathways or solutions,” he said.Even so, Wenski emphasized that lasting immigration reform must come from Congress.“The ball is in the court of the Senate.”

unitedyam

The Miami archbishop said the U.S. Senate should send the president legislation that would extend Temporary Protected Status protections to Haitians for three years.

Read More
Five years of euthanasia in Spain: The toll and path forward to overturn #Catholic It hasbeen five years since the Euthanasia Law came into effect in Spain — a law that, since its approval, has claimed the lives of 1,668 people, according to official data published by the Spanish Ministry of Health.Since its inception, the number of euthanasia procedures carried out in the country has risen steadily; from 75 in the second half of 2021 to 288 in 2022, followed by 334 in 2023, some 426 in 2024 and 565 in 2025.The Madrid-based Professionals for Ethics Association has issued a report that points out that the progression of euthanasia over the past five years shows that “once approved, euthanasia becomes a slippery slope” with destructive effects.In addition to accelerated year-to-year growth in the number of euthanasia cases, the ethics professionals cite the progressive expansion of the grounds for the procedure under the catch-all category of “severe suffering.”Euthanasia procedures have been streamlined “even at the cost of reducing or eliminating safeguards,” according to the report.Euthanasia is being promoted “as an altruistic choice, based on arguments regarding organ donation and bequests to pro-euthanasia associations.”The report denounces the “imposition of the so-called ‘right to die’ and personal autonomy over good medical practice.”The practice of euthanasia results in the “abandonment of clinical effort” in situations where it appears to be an “easier and less costly” option. The report also underscores that euthanasia “harms the relationship of trust” between patient and physician, as well as between the patient and their family members.The "normalization of euthanasia" in society and among healthcare professionals has led to the "loss of the meaning of vulnerable life, of aging, and of the value of caring for and accompanying” such patients, the report finds.Other destructive effects include “social pressure on dependent individuals based on ‘quality of life’ criteria and the perception of being a burden to others” and, finally, the fostering of individualism and “society’s indifference toward suffering.”RecommendationsBeyond pointing out dangers and contradictions inherent in the advance of euthanasia in Spain, the Professionals for Ethics Association proposes five measures “to reverse the slippery slope of euthanasia upon which we have already embarked.” The first recommended measure is to develop “the plan, organization, and resources necessary to provide nationwide palliative care coverage," which must include "home-based teams and specialized pediatric units."The ethics professionals also recommend boosting support “for vulnerable individuals and their families,” specifically those facing dependency, mental illness, and unwanted loneliness. This requires both the allocation of resources to address these challenges and facilitating “family support through programs that balance work and family life in order to provide care” for the patient.A third recommendation is to monitor official information regarding the euthanasia procedures performed in order to “ensure rigor in the processes for requesting and approving euthanasia,” as well as preventing lax interpretations of the law that make “euthanasia the easiest, most accessible, and quickest ‘solution’.”Fourth, the association holds that “it is vital to preserve the mission and objectives of healthcare aimed at preventing, curing, and caring for health as well as professional ethics and practice.”In this regard, the group emphasizes that “euthanasia runs counter to the essence of medicine, caring for human life, and should never be considered a medical act.” Thus, the association also advocates the right of healthcare workers to conscientiously object to participating in euthanasia procedures.Finally, the association calls for halting the promotion of euthanasia, as its rise “is neither a social good nor a sign of progress in human rights, nor is it even a neutral matter.”“The fact that an increasing number of people in Spain desire a lethal injection should be a cause for concern, not celebration,” the group emphasizes; and therefore advocates for “a euthanasia prevention plan” similar to those for suicide and, ultimately, the repeal of the euthanasia law and the enactment of legislation “that facilitates the care of human life until the very end.”This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.
Read More

Five years of euthanasia in Spain: The toll and path forward to overturn #Catholic It hasbeen five years since the Euthanasia Law came into effect in Spain — a law that, since its approval, has claimed the lives of 1,668 people, according to official data published by the Spanish Ministry of Health.Since its inception, the number of euthanasia procedures carried out in the country has risen steadily; from 75 in the second half of 2021 to 288 in 2022, followed by 334 in 2023, some 426 in 2024 and 565 in 2025.The Madrid-based Professionals for Ethics Association has issued a report that points out that the progression of euthanasia over the past five years shows that “once approved, euthanasia becomes a slippery slope” with destructive effects.In addition to accelerated year-to-year growth in the number of euthanasia cases, the ethics professionals cite the progressive expansion of the grounds for the procedure under the catch-all category of “severe suffering.”Euthanasia procedures have been streamlined “even at the cost of reducing or eliminating safeguards,” according to the report.Euthanasia is being promoted “as an altruistic choice, based on arguments regarding organ donation and bequests to pro-euthanasia associations.”The report denounces the “imposition of the so-called ‘right to die’ and personal autonomy over good medical practice.”The practice of euthanasia results in the “abandonment of clinical effort” in situations where it appears to be an “easier and less costly” option. The report also underscores that euthanasia “harms the relationship of trust” between patient and physician, as well as between the patient and their family members.The "normalization of euthanasia" in society and among healthcare professionals has led to the "loss of the meaning of vulnerable life, of aging, and of the value of caring for and accompanying” such patients, the report finds.Other destructive effects include “social pressure on dependent individuals based on ‘quality of life’ criteria and the perception of being a burden to others” and, finally, the fostering of individualism and “society’s indifference toward suffering.”RecommendationsBeyond pointing out dangers and contradictions inherent in the advance of euthanasia in Spain, the Professionals for Ethics Association proposes five measures “to reverse the slippery slope of euthanasia upon which we have already embarked.” The first recommended measure is to develop “the plan, organization, and resources necessary to provide nationwide palliative care coverage," which must include "home-based teams and specialized pediatric units."The ethics professionals also recommend boosting support “for vulnerable individuals and their families,” specifically those facing dependency, mental illness, and unwanted loneliness. This requires both the allocation of resources to address these challenges and facilitating “family support through programs that balance work and family life in order to provide care” for the patient.A third recommendation is to monitor official information regarding the euthanasia procedures performed in order to “ensure rigor in the processes for requesting and approving euthanasia,” as well as preventing lax interpretations of the law that make “euthanasia the easiest, most accessible, and quickest ‘solution’.”Fourth, the association holds that “it is vital to preserve the mission and objectives of healthcare aimed at preventing, curing, and caring for health as well as professional ethics and practice.”In this regard, the group emphasizes that “euthanasia runs counter to the essence of medicine, caring for human life, and should never be considered a medical act.” Thus, the association also advocates the right of healthcare workers to conscientiously object to participating in euthanasia procedures.Finally, the association calls for halting the promotion of euthanasia, as its rise “is neither a social good nor a sign of progress in human rights, nor is it even a neutral matter.”“The fact that an increasing number of people in Spain desire a lethal injection should be a cause for concern, not celebration,” the group emphasizes; and therefore advocates for “a euthanasia prevention plan” similar to those for suicide and, ultimately, the repeal of the euthanasia law and the enactment of legislation “that facilitates the care of human life until the very end.”This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.

unitedyam

Euthanasia is on the rise in Spain, and as its destructive effects become more apparent, ethics professionals are offering recommendations to prevent and ultimately eliminate the practice.

Read More