![Georgia appeals court blocks abuse suit against Atlanta Archdiocese, cites statute of limitations #Catholic A dozen alleged abuse victims suffered a defeat at a Georgia appeals court this week when their lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Atlanta was dismissed on the grounds that the alleged abuse did not fall under an extended statute of limitations. The case turned on whether or not the archdiocese had covered up the alleged clergy sexual abuse, which if true could have “tolled” the time limit for filing abuse claims. “Tolling” occurs when a statute of limitations is extended beyond a normal window, allowing alleged victims to file abuse claims years after they normally would have been barred from doing so. In the Atlanta case, a dozen alleged victims had filed numerous suits against the Archdiocese of Atlanta and numerous churches, claiming that Fathers John Edwards and Jorge Cristancho had abused them over multiple decades from the 1960s to the early 2000s. A lower court had dismissed the cases. The Georgia Court of Appeals on March 9 upheld the dismissal, arguing that the statute of limitations for the filings had expired and that the archdiocese had not committed any malfeasance that could have extended the filing window. The plaintiffs “failed to point to any evidence that the [the archdioceseʼs] actions concealed the Plaintiffs’ claims and prevented or hindered them from filing their lawsuits,” the ruling held. The alleged victims failed to prove that they “ever requested information from the [archdiocese] about their knowledge and involvement in the abuse, or that the [archdiocese] refused” to provide it. The three-judge panel acknowledged that it was “certainly mindful of the grievous circumstances involving heinous conduct which led to the filing of these cases.”Edwards and Cristancho are both listed by the archdiocese as “credibly accused” of sexual abuse. Edwards died in 1997; Cristancho was laicized in 2003. Statutes of limitations have been a key component of disputes in the U.S. Church for years, with lawmakers in recent years advocating and often passing bills retroactively extending the window for filing abuse claims. In 2023 Maryland passed the state Child Victims Act, which abolished a 20-year statute of limitations for civil child abuse suits. The Maryland Supreme Court ruled in 2025 that the law did not violate the state constitution.Numerous states such as New York, North Carolina, New Jersey, Colorado and others have enacted similar laws allowing for abuse victims to seek restitution for alleged incidents that occurred in decades past. Such legal arrangements are not limited to the United States. In January the Spanish Bishops’ Conference and the national government agreed to a compensation plan for abuse victims that will allow victims to file for restitution even if the alleged abuse falls outside of the standard statute of limitations.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/georgia-appeals-court-blocks-abuse-suit-against-atlanta-archdiocese-cites-statute-of-limitations-catholic-a-dozen-alleged-abuse-victims-suffered-a-defeat-at-a-georgia-appeals-court-this-week-when-th.jpg "Georgia appeals court blocks abuse suit against Atlanta Archdiocese, cites statute of limitations #Catholic A dozen alleged abuse victims suffered a defeat at a Georgia appeals court this week when their lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Atlanta was dismissed on the grounds that the alleged abuse did not fall under an extended statute of limitations. The case turned on whether or not the archdiocese had covered up the alleged clergy sexual abuse, which if true could have “tolled” the time limit for filing abuse claims. “Tolling” occurs when a statute of limitations is extended beyond a normal window, allowing alleged victims to file abuse claims years after they normally would have been barred from doing so. In the Atlanta case, a dozen alleged victims had filed numerous suits against the Archdiocese of Atlanta and numerous churches, claiming that Fathers John Edwards and Jorge Cristancho had abused them over multiple decades from the 1960s to the early 2000s. A lower court had dismissed the cases. The Georgia Court of Appeals on March 9 upheld the dismissal, arguing that the statute of limitations for the filings had expired and that the archdiocese had not committed any malfeasance that could have extended the filing window. The plaintiffs “failed to point to any evidence that the [the archdioceseʼs] actions concealed the Plaintiffs’ claims and prevented or hindered them from filing their lawsuits,” the ruling held. The alleged victims failed to prove that they “ever requested information from the [archdiocese] about their knowledge and involvement in the abuse, or that the [archdiocese] refused” to provide it. The three-judge panel acknowledged that it was “certainly mindful of the grievous circumstances involving heinous conduct which led to the filing of these cases.”Edwards and Cristancho are both listed by the archdiocese as “credibly accused” of sexual abuse. Edwards died in 1997; Cristancho was laicized in 2003. Statutes of limitations have been a key component of disputes in the U.S. Church for years, with lawmakers in recent years advocating and often passing bills retroactively extending the window for filing abuse claims. In 2023 Maryland passed the state Child Victims Act, which abolished a 20-year statute of limitations for civil child abuse suits. The Maryland Supreme Court ruled in 2025 that the law did not violate the state constitution.Numerous states such as New York, North Carolina, New Jersey, Colorado and others have enacted similar laws allowing for abuse victims to seek restitution for alleged incidents that occurred in decades past. Such legal arrangements are not limited to the United States. In January the Spanish Bishops’ Conference and the national government agreed to a compensation plan for abuse victims that will allow victims to file for restitution even if the alleged abuse falls outside of the standard statute of limitations.")
The statute of limitations could not be extended due to a lack of evidence of fraud by the archdiocese, the court said.
Catholic U.S. House Democrats cited Church teaching in defense of the dignity of migrants as Trump administration officials defend immigration enforcement.
![Puerto Rico’s penal code recognizes unborn babies as human beings #Catholic Puerto Rico Gov. Jenniffer González signed into law on Feb. 12 a bill amending the penal code to recognize unborn babies as human beings at “any stage of gestation.”Senate Bill 923 — which when signed became Law 18-2026 — amends Article 92 of the penal code, which currently states that “murder is the intentional, knowing, or reckless killing of a human being.”The new law establishes that “for the purposes of this chapter, ‘human being’ shall include any conceived [unborn child] at any stage of gestation within the mother’s womb.”This legislation was authored by González, a Republican. In a press release posted on X, she explained that the objective is to complement Law 166-2025, known as the Keyshla Madlane Law, named after a pregnant woman in Puerto Rico who was murdered in April 2021.This law, the press release states, “among other things, defines as first-degree murder the intentional and knowing killing of a pregnant woman, resulting in the death of the unborn child at any stage of gestation within the mother’s womb.”In this regard, the approval of Law 18-2026 stands out, noting that “the legislation aims to maintain consistency between civil and criminal provisions by recognizing the conceived unborn child as a human being.”In December 2025, the governor also signed into law Senate Bill 504, which amended the civil code to state that “a human being in gestation or nasciturus is a natural person, including the conceived child at any stage of gestation within the mother’s womb.”A natural person simply means a living human being as distinct from a legal person such as a corporation. At the time, all of these laws were criticized by feminist and pro-abortion groups, who argued that they could lead to a ban on abortion in Puerto Rico and other U.S. jurisdictions.However, Puerto Rico Sen. Joanne Rodríguez Veve defended the passage of Bill 923 in January, stating that “the message of this type of legislation is powerful. It reaffirms this kind of language in our public policy that in the womb of a pregnant woman there is not just anything, not a mere indefinable object, but a subject, a developing human being who has dignity and whose value is intrinsic to their human nature.”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.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/puerto-ricos-penal-code-recognizes-unborn-babies-as-human-beings-catholic-puerto-rico-gov-jenniffer-gonzalez-signed-into-law-on-feb-12-a-bill-amending-the-penal-code-to-recognize-unborn-ba.jpg "Puerto Rico’s penal code recognizes unborn babies as human beings #Catholic Puerto Rico Gov. Jenniffer González signed into law on Feb. 12 a bill amending the penal code to recognize unborn babies as human beings at “any stage of gestation.”Senate Bill 923 — which when signed became Law 18-2026 — amends Article 92 of the penal code, which currently states that “murder is the intentional, knowing, or reckless killing of a human being.”The new law establishes that “for the purposes of this chapter, ‘human being’ shall include any conceived [unborn child] at any stage of gestation within the mother’s womb.”This legislation was authored by González, a Republican. In a press release posted on X, she explained that the objective is to complement Law 166-2025, known as the Keyshla Madlane Law, named after a pregnant woman in Puerto Rico who was murdered in April 2021.This law, the press release states, “among other things, defines as first-degree murder the intentional and knowing killing of a pregnant woman, resulting in the death of the unborn child at any stage of gestation within the mother’s womb.”In this regard, the approval of Law 18-2026 stands out, noting that “the legislation aims to maintain consistency between civil and criminal provisions by recognizing the conceived unborn child as a human being.”In December 2025, the governor also signed into law Senate Bill 504, which amended the civil code to state that “a human being in gestation or nasciturus is a natural person, including the conceived child at any stage of gestation within the mother’s womb.”A natural person simply means a living human being as distinct from a legal person such as a corporation. At the time, all of these laws were criticized by feminist and pro-abortion groups, who argued that they could lead to a ban on abortion in Puerto Rico and other U.S. jurisdictions.However, Puerto Rico Sen. Joanne Rodríguez Veve defended the passage of Bill 923 in January, stating that “the message of this type of legislation is powerful. It reaffirms this kind of language in our public policy that in the womb of a pregnant woman there is not just anything, not a mere indefinable object, but a subject, a developing human being who has dignity and whose value is intrinsic to their human nature.”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.")
Puerto Rico Gov. Jenniffer González signed into law on Feb. 12 a bill amending the penal code to recognize unborn babies as human beings at “any stage of gestation.”
![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.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/democratic-lawmaker-asks-ice-director-if-hes-going-to-hell-in-fiery-hearing-catholic-a-democratic-lawmaker-asked-u-s-immigration-and-customs-enforcement-ice-acting-direc.jpg "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.")
Top U.S. immigration officials defended their policies during a contentious hearing as lawmakers continue to negotiate potential ICE funding and reforms.
The Franciscan Friars of California announced a bankruptcy filing in 2024 “to address 94 child sexual abuse claims.”
A Hungarian think tank’s new paper “Migration and Ethics: The Axioms of a Christian Migration Policy” prompts a meeting of the minds.
In spite of opposition from Catholic bishops and patient advocate groups, Gov. Kathy Hochul signed into law physician-assisted suicide in New York.
![Catholic convert Eva Vlaardingerbroek on censorship and immigration in Europe #Catholic Catholic Dutch political commentator and activist Eva Vlaardingerbroek said “the rule of law is dead” in Europe and detailed the issues of censorship and immigration on the continent.Vlaardingerbroek is an attorney and Catholic convert who has been outspoken about European immigration, national sovereignty, and free speech. Recently, the U.K. government banned her from entering the country due to her outspoken views.“Out of the blue, I saw that I had received an email from the U.K. government,” she told Raymond Arroyo on EWTN’s “The World Over with Raymond Arroyo.” It was “just a couple of sentences saying that my ETA, which is the travel authorization that Europeans need to travel to the U.K., had been revoked.”The reason they stated “was that I am ‘not conducive to the public good,’” she said. Vlaardingerbroek said she believes the ban occurred because she criticized the prime minister of the United Kingdom, Keir Starmer, on social media three days before receiving the email.The situation shows that “the rule of law is dead in Europe,” Vlaardingerbroek said. “Because if you get a notification like that out of the blue, you have no ability, no means to defend yourself … I don’t have a criminal record. I didn’t commit a crime.”“I got converted to Catholicism in the United Kingdom, so I have a couple of really dear friends there. Now, I’m no longer able to go because I say the wrong things, apparently. That is the state of Europe right now … They either throw you in jail or they make sure that you can’t enter the country. That’s what happens in the United Kingdom if you go against the grain,” she said.European immigrationVlaardingerbroek has also been outspoken about illegal immigration in Europe and said that mass immigration has destabilized Europe and led to spikes in violent crimes.“Anyone with two eyes can see that it’s true,” she said. Everyone who lives here, apart from maybe people living in ivory towers or in areas where there are no immigrants, everyone who lives in the real world knows that it’s true.”“I will continue speaking the truth about what I see happening to this beautiful continent of ours because it’s being destroyed,” she said. “We see churches burning down every week here in Europe, and that’s not a coincidence. That didn’t happen for hundreds of years, and suddenly now … they’re burning down faster than I can count.”“You can break the law coming here. It’s not being punished. In fact, it’s rewarded because people get to stay, people get free housing, people get free health care, and they’re able to just roam around even awaiting whether they are going to get their asylum approved or not.”“The governments and the legal system seem to be working hand in hand” and the “judges are complicit,” Vlaardingerbroek said. In Europe, the migrants that commit crimes are not held accountable because judges believe “they are traumatized because they come from a war zone” or due to their “their mental state.”“Then what ends up happening is these immigrants who rape, kill, and assault the native population, they just don’t get any real prison time, and they definitely do not get deported,” she said.“I think that this is a holdover from World War II,” she continued. Institutions including the European Union have “given evil one face and one face only” and “they refuse to see the difference between a Nazi and a conservative Christian.”“To them, it’s all the same, and that’s the way that they treat us,” she said. “I don’t think they’re afraid to acknowledge it. I think they honestly don’t care. I mean, the churches that are being burned down in France that we see, that’s a physical thing unfolding in front of our eyes.”The burning of churches “is powerful imagery that should wake people up to something else, something invisible, which is the agenda that is being carried out here to erode Christianity,” Vlaardingerbroek said.When the European Union discusses European culture, identity, and history, “they never mention Christianity,” Vlaardingerbroek said.“They actively removed it from their documents. They talk about the Enlightenment, but Christianity is never mentioned. They are actively eroding and erasing Christianity here in Europe because it threatens their agenda, because these people see [themselves] as God,” she said.U.S. immigrationAs debates over Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and law enforcement continue in the U.S, Vlaardingerbroek also discussed the status of immigration on this side of the pond.“As a Catholic, of course, we can be charitable. Nobody’s saying that we cannot allow some immigration or that we cannot help those in need. That is, of course, a Catholic ideal. That is a Catholic value … That’s what our legal system reflects,” she said.“That doesn’t mean, however, that when you come here illegally, which is what happens the majority of the time, and you break [the] laws, that we have to sit by and watch that happen.”ICE agents “are doing their job,” Vlaardingerbroek said. “They are enforcing the law. I think it’s a disgrace the way that they are being treated.”“I wish actually that here in Europe, we would have our version of ICE and that they would … send back home the people who come here illegally and who do not belong in these countries and who actively fight everything that we stand for, both in America and here in Europe,” Vlaardingerbroek said.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/catholic-convert-eva-vlaardingerbroek-on-censorship-and-immigration-in-europe-catholic-catholic-dutch-political-commentator-and-activist-eva-vlaardingerbroek-said-the-rule-of-law-is-dead.png "Catholic convert Eva Vlaardingerbroek on censorship and immigration in Europe #Catholic Catholic Dutch political commentator and activist Eva Vlaardingerbroek said “the rule of law is dead” in Europe and detailed the issues of censorship and immigration on the continent.Vlaardingerbroek is an attorney and Catholic convert who has been outspoken about European immigration, national sovereignty, and free speech. Recently, the U.K. government banned her from entering the country due to her outspoken views.“Out of the blue, I saw that I had received an email from the U.K. government,” she told Raymond Arroyo on EWTN’s “The World Over with Raymond Arroyo.” It was “just a couple of sentences saying that my ETA, which is the travel authorization that Europeans need to travel to the U.K., had been revoked.”The reason they stated “was that I am ‘not conducive to the public good,’” she said. Vlaardingerbroek said she believes the ban occurred because she criticized the prime minister of the United Kingdom, Keir Starmer, on social media three days before receiving the email.The situation shows that “the rule of law is dead in Europe,” Vlaardingerbroek said. “Because if you get a notification like that out of the blue, you have no ability, no means to defend yourself … I don’t have a criminal record. I didn’t commit a crime.”“I got converted to Catholicism in the United Kingdom, so I have a couple of really dear friends there. Now, I’m no longer able to go because I say the wrong things, apparently. That is the state of Europe right now … They either throw you in jail or they make sure that you can’t enter the country. That’s what happens in the United Kingdom if you go against the grain,” she said.European immigrationVlaardingerbroek has also been outspoken about illegal immigration in Europe and said that mass immigration has destabilized Europe and led to spikes in violent crimes.“Anyone with two eyes can see that it’s true,” she said. Everyone who lives here, apart from maybe people living in ivory towers or in areas where there are no immigrants, everyone who lives in the real world knows that it’s true.”“I will continue speaking the truth about what I see happening to this beautiful continent of ours because it’s being destroyed,” she said. “We see churches burning down every week here in Europe, and that’s not a coincidence. That didn’t happen for hundreds of years, and suddenly now … they’re burning down faster than I can count.”“You can break the law coming here. It’s not being punished. In fact, it’s rewarded because people get to stay, people get free housing, people get free health care, and they’re able to just roam around even awaiting whether they are going to get their asylum approved or not.”“The governments and the legal system seem to be working hand in hand” and the “judges are complicit,” Vlaardingerbroek said. In Europe, the migrants that commit crimes are not held accountable because judges believe “they are traumatized because they come from a war zone” or due to their “their mental state.”“Then what ends up happening is these immigrants who rape, kill, and assault the native population, they just don’t get any real prison time, and they definitely do not get deported,” she said.“I think that this is a holdover from World War II,” she continued. Institutions including the European Union have “given evil one face and one face only” and “they refuse to see the difference between a Nazi and a conservative Christian.”“To them, it’s all the same, and that’s the way that they treat us,” she said. “I don’t think they’re afraid to acknowledge it. I think they honestly don’t care. I mean, the churches that are being burned down in France that we see, that’s a physical thing unfolding in front of our eyes.”The burning of churches “is powerful imagery that should wake people up to something else, something invisible, which is the agenda that is being carried out here to erode Christianity,” Vlaardingerbroek said.When the European Union discusses European culture, identity, and history, “they never mention Christianity,” Vlaardingerbroek said.“They actively removed it from their documents. They talk about the Enlightenment, but Christianity is never mentioned. They are actively eroding and erasing Christianity here in Europe because it threatens their agenda, because these people see [themselves] as God,” she said.U.S. immigrationAs debates over Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and law enforcement continue in the U.S, Vlaardingerbroek also discussed the status of immigration on this side of the pond.“As a Catholic, of course, we can be charitable. Nobody’s saying that we cannot allow some immigration or that we cannot help those in need. That is, of course, a Catholic ideal. That is a Catholic value … That’s what our legal system reflects,” she said.“That doesn’t mean, however, that when you come here illegally, which is what happens the majority of the time, and you break [the] laws, that we have to sit by and watch that happen.”ICE agents “are doing their job,” Vlaardingerbroek said. “They are enforcing the law. I think it’s a disgrace the way that they are being treated.”“I wish actually that here in Europe, we would have our version of ICE and that they would … send back home the people who come here illegally and who do not belong in these countries and who actively fight everything that we stand for, both in America and here in Europe,” Vlaardingerbroek said.")
Catholic convert Eva Vlaardingerbroek discussed immigration and the state of free speech in Europe on EWTN’s “The World Over with Raymond Arroyo.”
The Haitians “leaving South Florida and other places in the United States so abruptly would cause great economic damage to the United States,” Archbishop Thomas Wenski said.
