Such restrictions on federal funding are made “without any compelling government interest,” the Justice Department said in a memorandum opinion.
A student challenges a 2004 Supreme Court decision, the Diocese of Scranton reopens its seminary, and Benedictine College names a speaker for its library dedication in this week’s education roundup.
Last year, 18-year-old Lexi Arguello died after complications from a late-term abortion. Activists say staff waited too long to call 911 — and note that women continue to be injured at the clinic.
![U.S. bishops urge Supreme Court to require 12-person juries for criminal cases #Catholic The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to require 12-person juries in criminal cases, with the bishops arguing against a Florida policy allowing smaller six-person juries in many cases. The case Kian v. Florida, which the Supreme Court agreed to hear in June, was brought after Florida chiropractor Hamed Kian was convicted of five felony counts for practicing without a license. Kian was found guilty by a six-person jury; the state of Florida only requires 12-person juries in capital cases. Several other states have similar rules. Kian sued the state arguing that the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees a right to a 12-person jury. He lost his appeal at the Fourth District Court of Appeal of Florida and subsequently appealed directly to the Supreme Court, which will hold arguments in the case in its upcoming term. In their amicus filing, the U.S. bishops argued that the term “jury” in the U.S. has historically referenced a body of 12 jurors; the bishops pointed to “Founding-era dictionaries” as well as “common-law history.” The bishops said they have a “strong interest” in the case, insofar as the Catholic Church over the centuries has played a “central role in shaping the legal culture from which the common-law jury emerged.”Among the historical examples of 12-person juries the bishops cited include the General Fundamentals of Plymouth, “the earliest codified legal system by English colonists in North America,” which guaranteed that “all trials” would be “tried by a jury of twelve good and lawful men.” The prelates disputed the Supreme Court’s 1970 ruling in the case Williams v. Florida, which held that the Sixth Amendment does not require 12 jurors in court cases. That ruling in part “discard[ed] the robust common-law history of the jury right,” while the high court in that decision “set far too high a bar for historical relevance,” they said.The bishops further cited the biblical commandment to “love your neighbor justly.” They pointed to the Catholic catechism’s mandate for public authorities to “dispense justice humanely by respecting the rights of everyone.” They urged the Supreme Court to “return to its previously long-held understanding that the Constitution entitles criminal defendants to a jury of twelve of their peers.”Numerous advocacy groups have also filed amicus briefs advocating the 12-juror standard, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Innocence Project, several dozen current and former prosecutors, and the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/u-s-bishops-urge-supreme-court-to-require-12-person-juries-for-criminal-cases-catholic-the-u-s-conference-of-catholic-bishops-is-urging-the-u-s-supreme-court-to-require-12-person-juries-in-crimina-scaled.jpg "U.S. bishops urge Supreme Court to require 12-person juries for criminal cases #Catholic The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to require 12-person juries in criminal cases, with the bishops arguing against a Florida policy allowing smaller six-person juries in many cases. The case Kian v. Florida, which the Supreme Court agreed to hear in June, was brought after Florida chiropractor Hamed Kian was convicted of five felony counts for practicing without a license. Kian was found guilty by a six-person jury; the state of Florida only requires 12-person juries in capital cases. Several other states have similar rules. Kian sued the state arguing that the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees a right to a 12-person jury. He lost his appeal at the Fourth District Court of Appeal of Florida and subsequently appealed directly to the Supreme Court, which will hold arguments in the case in its upcoming term. In their amicus filing, the U.S. bishops argued that the term “jury” in the U.S. has historically referenced a body of 12 jurors; the bishops pointed to “Founding-era dictionaries” as well as “common-law history.” The bishops said they have a “strong interest” in the case, insofar as the Catholic Church over the centuries has played a “central role in shaping the legal culture from which the common-law jury emerged.”Among the historical examples of 12-person juries the bishops cited include the General Fundamentals of Plymouth, “the earliest codified legal system by English colonists in North America,” which guaranteed that “all trials” would be “tried by a jury of twelve good and lawful men.” The prelates disputed the Supreme Court’s 1970 ruling in the case Williams v. Florida, which held that the Sixth Amendment does not require 12 jurors in court cases. That ruling in part “discard[ed] the robust common-law history of the jury right,” while the high court in that decision “set far too high a bar for historical relevance,” they said.The bishops further cited the biblical commandment to “love your neighbor justly.” They pointed to the Catholic catechism’s mandate for public authorities to “dispense justice humanely by respecting the rights of everyone.” They urged the Supreme Court to “return to its previously long-held understanding that the Constitution entitles criminal defendants to a jury of twelve of their peers.”Numerous advocacy groups have also filed amicus briefs advocating the 12-juror standard, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Innocence Project, several dozen current and former prosecutors, and the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.")
The bishops argue that the term “jury” in the U.S. has historically referenced a body of 12 jurors.
Several homes were looted and vandalized in a mainly Catholic village after the body of a Muslim man was found nearby, and 19 Indigenous villagers were arrested.
The Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC) criticized an executive order targeting birthright citizenship. The U.S. Catholic bishops are reviewing and monitoring the order.
Texas Children’s will pay $10 million to resolve the claims, with $8,576,000 going to the state of Texas, as well as fund, for five years, a first-of-its kind detransition clinic.
![Federal court hears arguments on Oklahoma’s ban for religious charter schools #Catholic A federal court heard oral arguments on Aug. 5 about whether an Oklahoma law banning religious charter schools violates the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.Oklahoma established a charter school system in 1999, which provides public funds for privately run K–12 schools to which parents can send their children instead of a public school operated by a school district. The law only allows “nonsectarian” applicants, which prevents any participation from schools that have a religious identity.In 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board (SCSB) approved an application from a proposed Catholic charter school — St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School — which led to a legal challenge from Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who opposed religious charter schools.The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided against the school, finding that charter schools are public schools and that public schools must be secular. St. Isidore appealed this to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that resulted in a 4-4 deadlock with no majority opinion because Justice Amy Coney Barrett had a conflict of interest and recused herself.Amid no clear guidance from the federal courts, a Jewish organization — National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation — filed an application to set up a charter school, which was denied. The group, represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund, filed a new lawsuit and asked a federal district court to require the SCSB to consider religious applicants.“Oklahoma makes room in its charter program for schools of all shapes and sizes, from those focused on science and fine arts to language immersion and classical education,” Daniel Chen, a Becket attorney representing the Jewish foundation, said in a statement.“The one it refuses to make room for is a faith-based school,” Chen added. “That is religious discrimination, plain and simple, and the state deserves a failing grade for it.”Chen told EWTN News that Becket is asking the federal court to immediately allow National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation to set up a charter school, citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent that requires government programs to allow religious institutions the same access as secular institutions.“They’re private actors,” he said. “And because they’re private actors, they cannot be excluded from participating in a public benefits program.”Chen said the federal district court is not bound by the precedent of the Oklahoma Supreme Court because that is a state court, so it could rule in favor of the school. He also said if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, he hopes Barrett can weigh in to break the 4-4 deadlock.“We’re hoping that [for] our case, there wouldn’t have to be any recusals,” he said.School board’s hands are tiedAlthough the charter school board denied the application from the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation, one of its lawyers at First Liberty Institute explained to EWTN News that its hands are tied by the statute and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision.“They’re following that order,” said Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty and the lawyer representing SCSB. “But [they] would be happy if the federal court didn’t [require the school board] to engage in that kind of discrimination.”Sasser said the SCSB does not want to exclude an applicant “simply because it’s religious” and would rather evaluate applicants “just based on the merits.” But he said the order “makes them exclude religious schools just because they’re religious.”“They want to maximize all of the various choices and opportunities for parents,” he added.Sasser said he hopes the question goes to the U.S. Supreme Court again so “we’ll get an answer — a real answer.” He said it would provide more clarity for the school board, which “needs an answer.”John Meiser, director of the Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic at the University of Notre Dame and the lawyer who represented St. Isidore at the Supreme Court, told EWTN News that the question ultimately comes down to whether charter schools are private or public institutions.In Oklahoma, he said charter schools “are called public schools” and that label “introduces a confusion that I don’t think would be present if they chose any other word.”He said Supreme Court precedent is clear that religious institutions must have equal access to government programs available to private institutions, but if a charter school is a “government school,” that “doesn’t apply” because the government “doesn’t and can’t run religious schools.”In spite of the label, Meiser said charter schools in Oklahoma are “formed and designed and run by private groups” and people who work there “are private employees.” He said the structure “looks just like a government contract” and funding from the government “doesn’t turn all those private contractors into the government itself.”“The dispute is really just about, ‘Well is a charter school in some way different?’” he said.Although Meiser said he is not aware of any ongoing Catholic efforts to recreate a charter school, he said that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s constitutional arguments for equal access “would presumably apply to all religious operators of schools, and so it would open the door to a Catholic charter school or other religiously based charter school.”Attorney general stands firmDrummond, who remains Oklahoma’s attorney general, is standing firm in opposing the creation of religious charter schools and is fighting against National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s efforts."This matter was resolved when the state Supreme Courtʼs ruling to prevent taxpayer funded religious charter schools was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year,” Leslie Berger, press secretary for the attorney general’s office, told EWTN News.Drummond has also criticized the charter school board in public statements surrounding this legal battle in March, accusing the SCSB of “playing politics with the taxpayers' money” and alleged it “manipulated the record [about why National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s application was rejected] to make that lawsuit easier to lose — not win.”"A state agency that deliberately hobbles its own legal position is not doing its job — it is betraying Oklahoma taxpayers,” he said. “I will not allow that.”Drummond has garnered support from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) for opposing the creation of religious charter schools.Attorneys for FFRF are representing seven Oklahomans who oppose their tax money being used to support religious charter schools.“The federal court should rule according to constitutional principles,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement. “A religious public charter school has no place in our secular public education system.”It’s unclear when the federal court will issue its ruling, but National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation has asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction against the state so it can begin operating a school while the litigation plays out.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/federal-court-hears-arguments-on-oklahomas-ban-for-religious-charter-schools-catholic-a-federal-court-heard-oral-arguments-on-aug-5-about-whether-an-oklahoma-law-banning-religious-charter-s.jpg "Federal court hears arguments on Oklahoma’s ban for religious charter schools #Catholic A federal court heard oral arguments on Aug. 5 about whether an Oklahoma law banning religious charter schools violates the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.Oklahoma established a charter school system in 1999, which provides public funds for privately run K–12 schools to which parents can send their children instead of a public school operated by a school district. The law only allows “nonsectarian” applicants, which prevents any participation from schools that have a religious identity.In 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board (SCSB) approved an application from a proposed Catholic charter school — St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School — which led to a legal challenge from Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who opposed religious charter schools.The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided against the school, finding that charter schools are public schools and that public schools must be secular. St. Isidore appealed this to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that resulted in a 4-4 deadlock with no majority opinion because Justice Amy Coney Barrett had a conflict of interest and recused herself.Amid no clear guidance from the federal courts, a Jewish organization — National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation — filed an application to set up a charter school, which was denied. The group, represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund, filed a new lawsuit and asked a federal district court to require the SCSB to consider religious applicants.“Oklahoma makes room in its charter program for schools of all shapes and sizes, from those focused on science and fine arts to language immersion and classical education,” Daniel Chen, a Becket attorney representing the Jewish foundation, said in a statement.“The one it refuses to make room for is a faith-based school,” Chen added. “That is religious discrimination, plain and simple, and the state deserves a failing grade for it.”Chen told EWTN News that Becket is asking the federal court to immediately allow National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation to set up a charter school, citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent that requires government programs to allow religious institutions the same access as secular institutions.“They’re private actors,” he said. “And because they’re private actors, they cannot be excluded from participating in a public benefits program.”Chen said the federal district court is not bound by the precedent of the Oklahoma Supreme Court because that is a state court, so it could rule in favor of the school. He also said if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, he hopes Barrett can weigh in to break the 4-4 deadlock.“We’re hoping that [for] our case, there wouldn’t have to be any recusals,” he said.School board’s hands are tiedAlthough the charter school board denied the application from the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation, one of its lawyers at First Liberty Institute explained to EWTN News that its hands are tied by the statute and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision.“They’re following that order,” said Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty and the lawyer representing SCSB. “But [they] would be happy if the federal court didn’t [require the school board] to engage in that kind of discrimination.”Sasser said the SCSB does not want to exclude an applicant “simply because it’s religious” and would rather evaluate applicants “just based on the merits.” But he said the order “makes them exclude religious schools just because they’re religious.”“They want to maximize all of the various choices and opportunities for parents,” he added.Sasser said he hopes the question goes to the U.S. Supreme Court again so “we’ll get an answer — a real answer.” He said it would provide more clarity for the school board, which “needs an answer.”John Meiser, director of the Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic at the University of Notre Dame and the lawyer who represented St. Isidore at the Supreme Court, told EWTN News that the question ultimately comes down to whether charter schools are private or public institutions.In Oklahoma, he said charter schools “are called public schools” and that label “introduces a confusion that I don’t think would be present if they chose any other word.”He said Supreme Court precedent is clear that religious institutions must have equal access to government programs available to private institutions, but if a charter school is a “government school,” that “doesn’t apply” because the government “doesn’t and can’t run religious schools.”In spite of the label, Meiser said charter schools in Oklahoma are “formed and designed and run by private groups” and people who work there “are private employees.” He said the structure “looks just like a government contract” and funding from the government “doesn’t turn all those private contractors into the government itself.”“The dispute is really just about, ‘Well is a charter school in some way different?’” he said.Although Meiser said he is not aware of any ongoing Catholic efforts to recreate a charter school, he said that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s constitutional arguments for equal access “would presumably apply to all religious operators of schools, and so it would open the door to a Catholic charter school or other religiously based charter school.”Attorney general stands firmDrummond, who remains Oklahoma’s attorney general, is standing firm in opposing the creation of religious charter schools and is fighting against National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s efforts.\"This matter was resolved when the state Supreme Courtʼs ruling to prevent taxpayer funded religious charter schools was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year,” Leslie Berger, press secretary for the attorney general’s office, told EWTN News.Drummond has also criticized the charter school board in public statements surrounding this legal battle in March, accusing the SCSB of “playing politics with the taxpayers' money” and alleged it “manipulated the record [about why National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s application was rejected] to make that lawsuit easier to lose — not win.”\"A state agency that deliberately hobbles its own legal position is not doing its job — it is betraying Oklahoma taxpayers,” he said. “I will not allow that.”Drummond has garnered support from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) for opposing the creation of religious charter schools.Attorneys for FFRF are representing seven Oklahomans who oppose their tax money being used to support religious charter schools.“The federal court should rule according to constitutional principles,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement. “A religious public charter school has no place in our secular public education system.”It’s unclear when the federal court will issue its ruling, but National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation has asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction against the state so it can begin operating a school while the litigation plays out.")
Oklahoma’s Statewide Charter School Board wants to approve religious charter schools, but a ruling from the Oklahoma Supreme Court and efforts by the state attorney general prevent it from doing so.
Bishop Daniel E. Garcia said the Voting Rights Act was born from the sacrifice of those who fought to secure equal access to the ballot, especially for communities of color long denied that right.
![March for Life president steps down to become ‘full-time mom’ #Catholic March for Life president steps down to focus on familyJennie Bradley Lichter, the president of the March for Life, is stepping down to devote more time to her family as a “full-time mom,” the leader said this week.“I have been humbled and inspired by the stories — so many stories, everywhere I go — of how the March for Life has changed people’s minds and hearts, how for so many Marchers it has sparked a lifetime of action and advocacy on behalf of the unborn, and in some cases, how it has changed the entire trajectory of their lives,” Bradley Lichter wrote in a farewell statement.She and her husband “are raising two tweens and a rising kindergartner, and it has become very clear that my family needs more of my time and my active presence than I’m able to give while leading the March for Life,” she said in the statement “My most important titles of all are not ‘President’ — but ‘wife’ and ‘Mom,’” she said.Bradley Lichter said that her role has been “the highlight of my professional life.”The resignation is effective July 31. The March for Life Board is actively searching for a new president.The annual demonstration draws tens of thousands to the nation’s capital yearly to advocate for the rights of unborn babies.Abortion drug present in municipal water, study findsA study published on July 20 in the Journal of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine highlighted the need for “significant additional investigation into the levels of various hormones and [endocrine-disrupting chemicals], including mifepristone, in water sources,” with researchers finding high levels of the abortion drug in municipal water supplies.Mifepristone is used in chemical abortions, as well as in treatment for miscarriages, and works by blocking progesterone, a hormone necessary for pregnancy. The investigation found “significant levels of mifepristone (up to 0.041 μgram/l) in the water of all but one of the nine sampling classes,” the study read. Water samples “were collected from sites upstream and downstream of water treatment facilities, and from municipal tap water,” from multiple American cities.“Because of the plethora of effects of progesterone, this contaminant could affect the physiology of aquatic animals; and human health, including fertility, pregnancy and fetal development,” the researchers said. Justice Department settles with pro-life father after FBI raidThe U.S. Department of Justice reached a seven-figure settlement with pro-life father Paul Vaughn after his home was raided by the FBI in connection with his pro-life work.The settlement affirmed that under the Biden administration, the government’s actions “were an abuse of government power,” according to a July 28 press release by the Thomas More Society, the legal nonprofit that defended Vaughn.Vaughn, a Catholic father of 11, was arrested at gunpoint after the FBI raided his house in connection with his protest at an abortion clinic. He is one of several pro-life advocates prosecuted under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act during the Biden administration.“My family has been through a traumatic ordeal that never should have happened. But today brings an end to this portion of the story,” Vaughn said in a statement.“This chapter is finally closed, and our family looks forward with gratitude and hope, as we continue to serve God, advocating for the most vulnerable among us without fear.”Catholic bishops of Massachusetts speak out against late-term abortion billThe Catholic bishops of Massachusetts spoke out this week against a bill that will legalize late-term abortion in the state.“As Catholic bishops we have a moral responsibility to present and uphold Catholic teaching and the sacred God-given dignity of every human life from conception to the natural death,” the bishops said in July 29 statement signed by Bishop William Byrne of Springfield, Archbishop Richard Henning of Boston, Bishop Robert McManus of Worcester, and Bishop Edgar da Cunha of Fall River.The state legislature passed the bill in July, with the Massachusetts Senate voting in favor of it on July 31. The measure, if signed into law, will remove the stateʼs 24-week limit on abortion.“The proposed elimination of any legal restraint on late-term abortion is, in our judgement, a radical measure which is gravely immoral,” the bishops’ statement read. The advocacy group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America is also strongly opposing the bill; the group’s president Marjorie Dannenfelser called for nationwide protections for unborn children.“If Gov. [Maura] Healey signs this bill into law, Massachusetts will join 10 states and Washington, D.C. with an all-trimester abortion policy where babies are killed after the point they can survive outside of the womb,” Dannenfelser told EWTN News. “These extreme laws that only 10% of Americans support are enabled by the ‘states-only’ philosophy on abortion,” she said.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/march-for-life-president-steps-down-to-become-full-time-mom-catholic-march-for-life-president-steps-down-to-focus-on-familyjennie-bradley-lichter-the-president-of-the-march-for-life-is-stepping.jpg "March for Life president steps down to become ‘full-time mom’ #Catholic March for Life president steps down to focus on familyJennie Bradley Lichter, the president of the March for Life, is stepping down to devote more time to her family as a “full-time mom,” the leader said this week.“I have been humbled and inspired by the stories — so many stories, everywhere I go — of how the March for Life has changed people’s minds and hearts, how for so many Marchers it has sparked a lifetime of action and advocacy on behalf of the unborn, and in some cases, how it has changed the entire trajectory of their lives,” Bradley Lichter wrote in a farewell statement.She and her husband “are raising two tweens and a rising kindergartner, and it has become very clear that my family needs more of my time and my active presence than I’m able to give while leading the March for Life,” she said in the statement “My most important titles of all are not ‘President’ — but ‘wife’ and ‘Mom,’” she said.Bradley Lichter said that her role has been “the highlight of my professional life.”The resignation is effective July 31. The March for Life Board is actively searching for a new president.The annual demonstration draws tens of thousands to the nation’s capital yearly to advocate for the rights of unborn babies.Abortion drug present in municipal water, study findsA study published on July 20 in the Journal of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine highlighted the need for “significant additional investigation into the levels of various hormones and [endocrine-disrupting chemicals], including mifepristone, in water sources,” with researchers finding high levels of the abortion drug in municipal water supplies.Mifepristone is used in chemical abortions, as well as in treatment for miscarriages, and works by blocking progesterone, a hormone necessary for pregnancy. The investigation found “significant levels of mifepristone (up to 0.041 μgram/l) in the water of all but one of the nine sampling classes,” the study read. Water samples “were collected from sites upstream and downstream of water treatment facilities, and from municipal tap water,” from multiple American cities.“Because of the plethora of effects of progesterone, this contaminant could affect the physiology of aquatic animals; and human health, including fertility, pregnancy and fetal development,” the researchers said. Justice Department settles with pro-life father after FBI raidThe U.S. Department of Justice reached a seven-figure settlement with pro-life father Paul Vaughn after his home was raided by the FBI in connection with his pro-life work.The settlement affirmed that under the Biden administration, the government’s actions “were an abuse of government power,” according to a July 28 press release by the Thomas More Society, the legal nonprofit that defended Vaughn.Vaughn, a Catholic father of 11, was arrested at gunpoint after the FBI raided his house in connection with his protest at an abortion clinic. He is one of several pro-life advocates prosecuted under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act during the Biden administration.“My family has been through a traumatic ordeal that never should have happened. But today brings an end to this portion of the story,” Vaughn said in a statement.“This chapter is finally closed, and our family looks forward with gratitude and hope, as we continue to serve God, advocating for the most vulnerable among us without fear.”Catholic bishops of Massachusetts speak out against late-term abortion billThe Catholic bishops of Massachusetts spoke out this week against a bill that will legalize late-term abortion in the state.“As Catholic bishops we have a moral responsibility to present and uphold Catholic teaching and the sacred God-given dignity of every human life from conception to the natural death,” the bishops said in July 29 statement signed by Bishop William Byrne of Springfield, Archbishop Richard Henning of Boston, Bishop Robert McManus of Worcester, and Bishop Edgar da Cunha of Fall River.The state legislature passed the bill in July, with the Massachusetts Senate voting in favor of it on July 31. The measure, if signed into law, will remove the stateʼs 24-week limit on abortion.“The proposed elimination of any legal restraint on late-term abortion is, in our judgement, a radical measure which is gravely immoral,” the bishops’ statement read. The advocacy group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America is also strongly opposing the bill; the group’s president Marjorie Dannenfelser called for nationwide protections for unborn children.“If Gov. [Maura] Healey signs this bill into law, Massachusetts will join 10 states and Washington, D.C. with an all-trimester abortion policy where babies are killed after the point they can survive outside of the womb,” Dannenfelser told EWTN News. “These extreme laws that only 10% of Americans support are enabled by the ‘states-only’ philosophy on abortion,” she said.")
“France is leading the way in Europe by becoming the first country to establish a ‘digital age of majority,’” said the country’s minister delegate for digital sovereignty.
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.
But even if you should suffer for doing what is right, how happy you are! Do not be afraid of anyone, and do not worry.
Read More