Lawsuit

Poll: 7 in 10 voters support requiring doctor’s visit for abortion pills #Catholic 
 
 null / Credit: SibRapid/Shutterstock

Denver, Colorado, Nov 1, 2025 / 07:19 am (CNA).
Here is a roundup of recent pro-life and abortion-related news.7 in 10 voters support requiring doctor’s visit for abortion pills More than 7 in 10 voters believe a doctor’s visit should be required for a chemical abortion prescription, a recent poll found. The McLaughlin & Associates poll of 1,600 participants found that 71% of voters approved of a proposal “requiring a doctor’s visit in order for the chemical abortion drug to be prescribed to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.” The poll also found that 30% of voters had “significant concerns” about the safety of the abortion pill.  Current federal regulations allow providers to prescribe abortion drugs through telehealth and send them by mail. States like California even allow anonymous prescription of the abortion pill, and states including New York and California have “shield laws” that protect abortion providers who ship drugs into states where it is illegal. SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said this week, “The harmful impact of Biden’s FDA removing safeguards on abortion drugs, like in-person doctor visits, is an issue that overwhelmingly unites voters of all stripes.”“As a growing body of research indicates these drugs are far more dangerous than advertised, and new horror stories emerge day after day of women coerced and drugged against their will, landing in the ER and even dying along with their babies, Americans’ concerns are more than valid,” she said in an Oct. 28 statement.Dannenfelser urged the Trump administration to “heed the emerging science and the will of the people and immediately reinstate in-person doctor visits.” Texas AG Paxton secures win in Yelp’s targeting of pregnancy centersTexas Attorney General Ken Paxton secured an appellate court victory against Yelp, Inc. for allegedly adding misleading notices to pro-life pregnancy centers. Paxton filed the lawsuit after misleading notices were attached to the pages of crisis pregnancy centers. The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s dismissal, which had concluded that Texas did not have jurisdiction over Yelp because it is based in California. The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals concluded this week that the company is still “subject to specific jurisdiction in Texas” and that the concern is relevant to other states as well. “As evidenced by the number of attorneys general who signed the letter sent to Yelp, several states share Texas’s interest in ensuring that Crisis Pregnancy Centers are not the targets of actionable misleading statements,” Justice April Farris wrote in the opinion. Paxton said in a statement that Yelp tried to “steer users away from pro-life resources,” noting that Texas will keep Yelp accountable. Paxton pledged to “continue to defend pro-life organizations that serve Texans and make sure that women and families are receiving accurate information about our state’s resources.”Virginia superintendent denies that staff facilitated student abortionsA Virginia public school district has denied allegations that staff at a high school facilitated student abortions without parental consent or knowledge.In an Oct. 16 letter to families and staff at Centreville High School, Fairfax County Superintendent Michelle Reid said that internal investigations found that the “allegations are likely untrue” as “new details have emerged.” In the wake of an investigative report by a local blogger and accusations by a teacher on staff, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin instructed police to launch a criminal investigation. U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee as well as the U.S. Department of Education also launched investigations. Reid said that “such behavior would never be acceptable” in the school district, which “is fully cooperating with these government investigations.” Planned Parenthood Wisconsin resumes abortionsAfter a temporary pause this month, Wisconsin Planned Parenthood resumed providing abortions in the state by giving up its designation as an “essential community provider” under the Affordable Care Act. Planned Parenthood Wisconsin stopped offering abortions on Oct. 1, after President Donald Trump cut federal Medicaid funding for abortion providers. The yearlong pause is designed to prevent federal tax dollars from subsidizing organizations that provide abortions. Heather Weininger, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, said, “Planned Parenthood’s abortion-first business model underscores why taxpayer funding should never support organizations that make abortion a priority.”“Women in difficult circumstances deserve compassionate, life-affirming care — the kind of support the pro-life movement is committed to offering,” she said in an Oct. 27 statement.  Ohio cuts medicaid contract with Planned Parenthood Ohio has terminated Medicaid provider contracts with Planned Parenthood, preventing state funds from going to the abortion giant there.The Ohio Department of Medicaid cited Trump’s recent yearlong pause on Medicaid reimbursements to abortion providers as the reason for termination. Planned Parenthood has since requested a hearing with the department to oppose the termination. Whether the state’s decision to end the agreement will extend longer than the federal pause is unclear.

Poll: 7 in 10 voters support requiring doctor’s visit for abortion pills #Catholic null / Credit: SibRapid/Shutterstock Denver, Colorado, Nov 1, 2025 / 07:19 am (CNA). Here is a roundup of recent pro-life and abortion-related news.7 in 10 voters support requiring doctor’s visit for abortion pills More than 7 in 10 voters believe a doctor’s visit should be required for a chemical abortion prescription, a recent poll found. The McLaughlin & Associates poll of 1,600 participants found that 71% of voters approved of a proposal “requiring a doctor’s visit in order for the chemical abortion drug to be prescribed to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.” The poll also found that 30% of voters had “significant concerns” about the safety of the abortion pill.  Current federal regulations allow providers to prescribe abortion drugs through telehealth and send them by mail. States like California even allow anonymous prescription of the abortion pill, and states including New York and California have “shield laws” that protect abortion providers who ship drugs into states where it is illegal. SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said this week, “The harmful impact of Biden’s FDA removing safeguards on abortion drugs, like in-person doctor visits, is an issue that overwhelmingly unites voters of all stripes.”“As a growing body of research indicates these drugs are far more dangerous than advertised, and new horror stories emerge day after day of women coerced and drugged against their will, landing in the ER and even dying along with their babies, Americans’ concerns are more than valid,” she said in an Oct. 28 statement.Dannenfelser urged the Trump administration to “heed the emerging science and the will of the people and immediately reinstate in-person doctor visits.” Texas AG Paxton secures win in Yelp’s targeting of pregnancy centersTexas Attorney General Ken Paxton secured an appellate court victory against Yelp, Inc. for allegedly adding misleading notices to pro-life pregnancy centers. Paxton filed the lawsuit after misleading notices were attached to the pages of crisis pregnancy centers. The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s dismissal, which had concluded that Texas did not have jurisdiction over Yelp because it is based in California. The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals concluded this week that the company is still “subject to specific jurisdiction in Texas” and that the concern is relevant to other states as well. “As evidenced by the number of attorneys general who signed the letter sent to Yelp, several states share Texas’s interest in ensuring that Crisis Pregnancy Centers are not the targets of actionable misleading statements,” Justice April Farris wrote in the opinion. Paxton said in a statement that Yelp tried to “steer users away from pro-life resources,” noting that Texas will keep Yelp accountable. Paxton pledged to “continue to defend pro-life organizations that serve Texans and make sure that women and families are receiving accurate information about our state’s resources.”Virginia superintendent denies that staff facilitated student abortionsA Virginia public school district has denied allegations that staff at a high school facilitated student abortions without parental consent or knowledge.In an Oct. 16 letter to families and staff at Centreville High School, Fairfax County Superintendent Michelle Reid said that internal investigations found that the “allegations are likely untrue” as “new details have emerged.” In the wake of an investigative report by a local blogger and accusations by a teacher on staff, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin instructed police to launch a criminal investigation. U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee as well as the U.S. Department of Education also launched investigations. Reid said that “such behavior would never be acceptable” in the school district, which “is fully cooperating with these government investigations.” Planned Parenthood Wisconsin resumes abortionsAfter a temporary pause this month, Wisconsin Planned Parenthood resumed providing abortions in the state by giving up its designation as an “essential community provider” under the Affordable Care Act. Planned Parenthood Wisconsin stopped offering abortions on Oct. 1, after President Donald Trump cut federal Medicaid funding for abortion providers. The yearlong pause is designed to prevent federal tax dollars from subsidizing organizations that provide abortions. Heather Weininger, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, said, “Planned Parenthood’s abortion-first business model underscores why taxpayer funding should never support organizations that make abortion a priority.”“Women in difficult circumstances deserve compassionate, life-affirming care — the kind of support the pro-life movement is committed to offering,” she said in an Oct. 27 statement.  Ohio cuts medicaid contract with Planned Parenthood Ohio has terminated Medicaid provider contracts with Planned Parenthood, preventing state funds from going to the abortion giant there.The Ohio Department of Medicaid cited Trump’s recent yearlong pause on Medicaid reimbursements to abortion providers as the reason for termination. Planned Parenthood has since requested a hearing with the department to oppose the termination. Whether the state’s decision to end the agreement will extend longer than the federal pause is unclear.


null / Credit: SibRapid/Shutterstock

Denver, Colorado, Nov 1, 2025 / 07:19 am (CNA).

Here is a roundup of recent pro-life and abortion-related news.

7 in 10 voters support requiring doctor’s visit for abortion pills 

More than 7 in 10 voters believe a doctor’s visit should be required for a chemical abortion prescription, a recent poll found. 

The McLaughlin & Associates poll of 1,600 participants found that 71% of voters approved of a proposal “requiring a doctor’s visit in order for the chemical abortion drug to be prescribed to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.” 

The poll also found that 30% of voters had “significant concerns” about the safety of the abortion pill.  

Current federal regulations allow providers to prescribe abortion drugs through telehealth and send them by mail. 

States like California even allow anonymous prescription of the abortion pill, and states including New York and California have “shield laws” that protect abortion providers who ship drugs into states where it is illegal. 

SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said this week, “The harmful impact of Biden’s FDA removing safeguards on abortion drugs, like in-person doctor visits, is an issue that overwhelmingly unites voters of all stripes.”

“As a growing body of research indicates these drugs are far more dangerous than advertised, and new horror stories emerge day after day of women coerced and drugged against their will, landing in the ER and even dying along with their babies, Americans’ concerns are more than valid,” she said in an Oct. 28 statement.

Dannenfelser urged the Trump administration to “heed the emerging science and the will of the people and immediately reinstate in-person doctor visits.” 

Texas AG Paxton secures win in Yelp’s targeting of pregnancy centers

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton secured an appellate court victory against Yelp, Inc. for allegedly adding misleading notices to pro-life pregnancy centers. 

Paxton filed the lawsuit after misleading notices were attached to the pages of crisis pregnancy centers. The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s dismissal, which had concluded that Texas did not have jurisdiction over Yelp because it is based in California. 

The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals concluded this week that the company is still “subject to specific jurisdiction in Texas” and that the concern is relevant to other states as well. 

“As evidenced by the number of attorneys general who signed the letter sent to Yelp, several states share Texas’s interest in ensuring that Crisis Pregnancy Centers are not the targets of actionable misleading statements,” Justice April Farris wrote in the opinion

Paxton said in a statement that Yelp tried to “steer users away from pro-life resources,” noting that Texas will keep Yelp accountable. 

Paxton pledged to “continue to defend pro-life organizations that serve Texans and make sure that women and families are receiving accurate information about our state’s resources.”

Virginia superintendent denies that staff facilitated student abortions

A Virginia public school district has denied allegations that staff at a high school facilitated student abortions without parental consent or knowledge.

In an Oct. 16 letter to families and staff at Centreville High School, Fairfax County Superintendent Michelle Reid said that internal investigations found that the “allegations are likely untrue” as “new details have emerged.” 

In the wake of an investigative report by a local blogger and accusations by a teacher on staff, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin instructed police to launch a criminal investigation. U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee as well as the U.S. Department of Education also launched investigations. 

Reid said that “such behavior would never be acceptable” in the school district, which “is fully cooperating with these government investigations.” 

Planned Parenthood Wisconsin resumes abortions

After a temporary pause this month, Wisconsin Planned Parenthood resumed providing abortions in the state by giving up its designation as an “essential community provider” under the Affordable Care Act. 

Planned Parenthood Wisconsin stopped offering abortions on Oct. 1, after President Donald Trump cut federal Medicaid funding for abortion providers. The yearlong pause is designed to prevent federal tax dollars from subsidizing organizations that provide abortions. 

Heather Weininger, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, said, “Planned Parenthood’s abortion-first business model underscores why taxpayer funding should never support organizations that make abortion a priority.”

“Women in difficult circumstances deserve compassionate, life-affirming care — the kind of support the pro-life movement is committed to offering,” she said in an Oct. 27 statement.  

Ohio cuts medicaid contract with Planned Parenthood 

Ohio has terminated Medicaid provider contracts with Planned Parenthood, preventing state funds from going to the abortion giant there.

The Ohio Department of Medicaid cited Trump’s recent yearlong pause on Medicaid reimbursements to abortion providers as the reason for termination. Planned Parenthood has since requested a hearing with the department to oppose the termination. Whether the state’s decision to end the agreement will extend longer than the federal pause is unclear.

Read More
New Jersey says parish finance director stole more than 0,000 in church funds #Catholic 
 
 null / Credit: vmargineanu/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Oct 18, 2025 / 14:15 pm (CNA).
Officials in New Jersey have charged a former parish financial director with the theft of more than half a million dollars in church funds. Joseph Manzi has been charged with second-degree theft by unlawful taking after he allegedly stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from St. Leo the Great Parish in Lincroft. Manzi was the subject of an August lawsuit by the parish in which he was alleged to have “systematically, secretly, and dishonestly utilized parish funds for his own personal benefit.” The civil suit claimed he had stolen upwards of .5 million. In an Oct. 17 press release, New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin’s office said Manzi had been officially criminally charged with the theft. Platkin in the release said Manzi used the funds “not to feed his family or for some kind of emergency, but to live a more lavish lifestyle.”Manzi stopped working at the Lincroft parish in June of this year, the office said. Afterwards, church staff reviewed credit card statements and found “numerous unauthorized charges that were determined to allegedly be for Manzi’s personal benefit.”The state alleged that Manzi used stolen funds for “event vendors, vehicle repairs, financing, and purchases, including a Cadillac SUV,” as well as purchases such as luxury clothing, sports event tickets and “chartered fishing trips.”Manzi is facing up to 10 years in prison and fines of up to 0,000. It was not immediately clear why the prosecutor’s office charged Manzi with about  million less in theft than the August civil suit alleged. The attorney general’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Oct. 18 seeking clarification on the figures. On its website, the St. Leo parish said the controversy “will not prevent Saint Leo the Great Parish from working every day to live our mission – to serve Parishioners and the community in God’s name with the greatest of love and compassion.” “We ask you all to stand together in our shared faith and to pray for a swift and just conclusion to this troubling chapter,” the parish said.

New Jersey says parish finance director stole more than $500,000 in church funds #Catholic null / Credit: vmargineanu/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Oct 18, 2025 / 14:15 pm (CNA). Officials in New Jersey have charged a former parish financial director with the theft of more than half a million dollars in church funds. Joseph Manzi has been charged with second-degree theft by unlawful taking after he allegedly stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from St. Leo the Great Parish in Lincroft. Manzi was the subject of an August lawsuit by the parish in which he was alleged to have “systematically, secretly, and dishonestly utilized parish funds for his own personal benefit.” The civil suit claimed he had stolen upwards of $1.5 million. In an Oct. 17 press release, New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin’s office said Manzi had been officially criminally charged with the theft. Platkin in the release said Manzi used the funds “not to feed his family or for some kind of emergency, but to live a more lavish lifestyle.”Manzi stopped working at the Lincroft parish in June of this year, the office said. Afterwards, church staff reviewed credit card statements and found “numerous unauthorized charges that were determined to allegedly be for Manzi’s personal benefit.”The state alleged that Manzi used stolen funds for “event vendors, vehicle repairs, financing, and purchases, including a Cadillac SUV,” as well as purchases such as luxury clothing, sports event tickets and “chartered fishing trips.”Manzi is facing up to 10 years in prison and fines of up to $150,000. It was not immediately clear why the prosecutor’s office charged Manzi with about $1 million less in theft than the August civil suit alleged. The attorney general’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Oct. 18 seeking clarification on the figures. On its website, the St. Leo parish said the controversy “will not prevent Saint Leo the Great Parish from working every day to live our mission – to serve Parishioners and the community in God’s name with the greatest of love and compassion.” “We ask you all to stand together in our shared faith and to pray for a swift and just conclusion to this troubling chapter,” the parish said.


null / Credit: vmargineanu/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Oct 18, 2025 / 14:15 pm (CNA).

Officials in New Jersey have charged a former parish financial director with the theft of more than half a million dollars in church funds.

Joseph Manzi has been charged with second-degree theft by unlawful taking after he allegedly stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from St. Leo the Great Parish in Lincroft.

Manzi was the subject of an August lawsuit by the parish in which he was alleged to have “systematically, secretly, and dishonestly utilized parish funds for his own personal benefit.” The civil suit claimed he had stolen upwards of $1.5 million.

In an Oct. 17 press release, New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin’s office said Manzi had been officially criminally charged with the theft. Platkin in the release said Manzi used the funds “not to feed his family or for some kind of emergency, but to live a more lavish lifestyle.”

Manzi stopped working at the Lincroft parish in June of this year, the office said. Afterwards, church staff reviewed credit card statements and found “numerous unauthorized charges that were determined to allegedly be for Manzi’s personal benefit.”

The state alleged that Manzi used stolen funds for “event vendors, vehicle repairs, financing, and purchases, including a Cadillac SUV,” as well as purchases such as luxury clothing, sports event tickets and “chartered fishing trips.”

Manzi is facing up to 10 years in prison and fines of up to $150,000.

It was not immediately clear why the prosecutor’s office charged Manzi with about $1 million less in theft than the August civil suit alleged. The attorney general’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Oct. 18 seeking clarification on the figures.

On its website, the St. Leo parish said the controversy “will not prevent Saint Leo the Great Parish from working every day to live our mission – to serve Parishioners and the community in God’s name with the greatest of love and compassion.”

“We ask you all to stand together in our shared faith and to pray for a swift and just conclusion to this troubling chapter,” the parish said.

Read More
Judge rules against saints’ statues on Massachusetts government building #Catholic 
 
 Statues of St. Florian (at left) and St. Michael the Archangel (at right) are currently barred from appearing on the planned public safety building of Quincy, Massachusetts. / Credit: Courtesy of Office of Mayor Thomas Koch

Boston, Massachusetts, Oct 16, 2025 / 12:18 pm (CNA).
A Massachusetts trial court judge has issued an order blocking the installation of statues of two Catholic saints on a new public safety building in the city of Quincy, setting up a likely appeal that may determine how the state treats separation of church and state disputes going forward.The 10-foot-high bronze statues of St. Michael the Archangel and St. Florian, which were scheduled to be installed on the building’s façade this month, will instead await a higher court’s decision.The statues cost an estimated $850,000, part of the new, $175 million public safety building that will serve as police headquarters and administration offices for the Boston suburb’s fire department.Quincy Mayor Thomas Koch, a practicing Catholic, has said he chose St. Michael the Archangel because he is the patron of police officers and St. Florian because he is the patron of firefighters, not to send a message about religion.But the judge said the statues can’t be separated from the saints’ Catholic connections.“The complaint here plausibly alleges that the statues at issue convey a message endorsing one religion over others,” Norfolk County Superior Court Judge William Sullivan wrote in a 26-page ruling Oct. 14.The judge noted that the statues “represent two Catholic saints.”“The statues, particularly when considered together, patently endorse Catholic beliefs,” the judge wrote.The plaintiffs who brought the lawsuit challenging the statues — 15 city residents represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts — have amassed facts that “plausibly suggest that an objective observer would view these statues on the façade of the public safety building as primarily endorsing Catholicism/Christianity and conveying a distinctly religious message,” the judge wrote.Rachel Davidson, staff attorney at the ACLU of Massachusetts, who argued the case during a lengthy court hearing on Sept. 19, praised the judge’s decision.“This ruling affirms the bedrock principle that our government cannot favor one religion above others, or religious beliefs over nonreligious beliefs,” Davidson said in a written statement. “We are grateful to the court for acknowledging the immediate harm that the installation of these statues would cause and for ensuring that Quincy residents can continue to make their case for the proper separation of church and state, as the Massachusetts Constitution requires.”The mayor said the city will appeal.“We chose the statues of Michael and Florian to honor Quincy’s first responders, not to promote any religion,” Koch said in a written statement provided to the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, by a spokesman. “These figures are recognized symbols of courage and sacrifice in police and fire communities across the world. We will appeal this ruling so our city can continue to celebrate and inspire the men and women who protect us.” The lawsuit, which was filed May 27 in Norfolk County Superior Court in Dedham, relies on the Massachusetts Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution, but there is a tie-in.In 1979, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court adopted the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1971 three-pronged “Lemon test” when considering church and state cases — whether a law concerning religion has “a secular legislative purpose,” whether “its principal or primary effect … neither advances [n]or inhibits religion,” and whether it fosters “excessive entanglement between government and religion.” The state’s highest court also added a fourth standard — whether a “challenged practice” has “divisive political potential.”But in June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court ditched the Lemon test in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, a case involving prayers offered by a high school football coach in Washington state.If the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which is the ultimate interpreter of state law, takes the Quincy statues dispute, it would be the first time the court has considered a case on point since the U.S. Supreme Court’s Kennedy decision.This story was first published by the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, and has been adapted by CNA.

Judge rules against saints’ statues on Massachusetts government building #Catholic Statues of St. Florian (at left) and St. Michael the Archangel (at right) are currently barred from appearing on the planned public safety building of Quincy, Massachusetts. / Credit: Courtesy of Office of Mayor Thomas Koch Boston, Massachusetts, Oct 16, 2025 / 12:18 pm (CNA). A Massachusetts trial court judge has issued an order blocking the installation of statues of two Catholic saints on a new public safety building in the city of Quincy, setting up a likely appeal that may determine how the state treats separation of church and state disputes going forward.The 10-foot-high bronze statues of St. Michael the Archangel and St. Florian, which were scheduled to be installed on the building’s façade this month, will instead await a higher court’s decision.The statues cost an estimated $850,000, part of the new, $175 million public safety building that will serve as police headquarters and administration offices for the Boston suburb’s fire department.Quincy Mayor Thomas Koch, a practicing Catholic, has said he chose St. Michael the Archangel because he is the patron of police officers and St. Florian because he is the patron of firefighters, not to send a message about religion.But the judge said the statues can’t be separated from the saints’ Catholic connections.“The complaint here plausibly alleges that the statues at issue convey a message endorsing one religion over others,” Norfolk County Superior Court Judge William Sullivan wrote in a 26-page ruling Oct. 14.The judge noted that the statues “represent two Catholic saints.”“The statues, particularly when considered together, patently endorse Catholic beliefs,” the judge wrote.The plaintiffs who brought the lawsuit challenging the statues — 15 city residents represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts — have amassed facts that “plausibly suggest that an objective observer would view these statues on the façade of the public safety building as primarily endorsing Catholicism/Christianity and conveying a distinctly religious message,” the judge wrote.Rachel Davidson, staff attorney at the ACLU of Massachusetts, who argued the case during a lengthy court hearing on Sept. 19, praised the judge’s decision.“This ruling affirms the bedrock principle that our government cannot favor one religion above others, or religious beliefs over nonreligious beliefs,” Davidson said in a written statement. “We are grateful to the court for acknowledging the immediate harm that the installation of these statues would cause and for ensuring that Quincy residents can continue to make their case for the proper separation of church and state, as the Massachusetts Constitution requires.”The mayor said the city will appeal.“We chose the statues of Michael and Florian to honor Quincy’s first responders, not to promote any religion,” Koch said in a written statement provided to the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, by a spokesman. “These figures are recognized symbols of courage and sacrifice in police and fire communities across the world. We will appeal this ruling so our city can continue to celebrate and inspire the men and women who protect us.” The lawsuit, which was filed May 27 in Norfolk County Superior Court in Dedham, relies on the Massachusetts Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution, but there is a tie-in.In 1979, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court adopted the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1971 three-pronged “Lemon test” when considering church and state cases — whether a law concerning religion has “a secular legislative purpose,” whether “its principal or primary effect … neither advances [n]or inhibits religion,” and whether it fosters “excessive entanglement between government and religion.” The state’s highest court also added a fourth standard — whether a “challenged practice” has “divisive political potential.”But in June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court ditched the Lemon test in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, a case involving prayers offered by a high school football coach in Washington state.If the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which is the ultimate interpreter of state law, takes the Quincy statues dispute, it would be the first time the court has considered a case on point since the U.S. Supreme Court’s Kennedy decision.This story was first published by the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, and has been adapted by CNA.


Statues of St. Florian (at left) and St. Michael the Archangel (at right) are currently barred from appearing on the planned public safety building of Quincy, Massachusetts. / Credit: Courtesy of Office of Mayor Thomas Koch

Boston, Massachusetts, Oct 16, 2025 / 12:18 pm (CNA).

A Massachusetts trial court judge has issued an order blocking the installation of statues of two Catholic saints on a new public safety building in the city of Quincy, setting up a likely appeal that may determine how the state treats separation of church and state disputes going forward.

The 10-foot-high bronze statues of St. Michael the Archangel and St. Florian, which were scheduled to be installed on the building’s façade this month, will instead await a higher court’s decision.

The statues cost an estimated $850,000, part of the new, $175 million public safety building that will serve as police headquarters and administration offices for the Boston suburb’s fire department.

Quincy Mayor Thomas Koch, a practicing Catholic, has said he chose St. Michael the Archangel because he is the patron of police officers and St. Florian because he is the patron of firefighters, not to send a message about religion.

But the judge said the statues can’t be separated from the saints’ Catholic connections.

“The complaint here plausibly alleges that the statues at issue convey a message endorsing one religion over others,” Norfolk County Superior Court Judge William Sullivan wrote in a 26-page ruling Oct. 14.

The judge noted that the statues “represent two Catholic saints.”

“The statues, particularly when considered together, patently endorse Catholic beliefs,” the judge wrote.

The plaintiffs who brought the lawsuit challenging the statues — 15 city residents represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts — have amassed facts that “plausibly suggest that an objective observer would view these statues on the façade of the public safety building as primarily endorsing Catholicism/Christianity and conveying a distinctly religious message,” the judge wrote.

Rachel Davidson, staff attorney at the ACLU of Massachusetts, who argued the case during a lengthy court hearing on Sept. 19, praised the judge’s decision.

“This ruling affirms the bedrock principle that our government cannot favor one religion above others, or religious beliefs over nonreligious beliefs,” Davidson said in a written statement. “We are grateful to the court for acknowledging the immediate harm that the installation of these statues would cause and for ensuring that Quincy residents can continue to make their case for the proper separation of church and state, as the Massachusetts Constitution requires.”

The mayor said the city will appeal.

“We chose the statues of Michael and Florian to honor Quincy’s first responders, not to promote any religion,” Koch said in a written statement provided to the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, by a spokesman. “These figures are recognized symbols of courage and sacrifice in police and fire communities across the world. We will appeal this ruling so our city can continue to celebrate and inspire the men and women who protect us.” The lawsuit, which was filed May 27 in Norfolk County Superior Court in Dedham, relies on the Massachusetts Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution, but there is a tie-in.

In 1979, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court adopted the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1971 three-pronged “Lemon test” when considering church and state cases — whether a law concerning religion has “a secular legislative purpose,” whether “its principal or primary effect … neither advances [n]or inhibits religion,” and whether it fosters “excessive entanglement between government and religion.” 

The state’s highest court also added a fourth standard — whether a “challenged practice” has “divisive political potential.”

But in June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court ditched the Lemon test in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, a case involving prayers offered by a high school football coach in Washington state.

If the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which is the ultimate interpreter of state law, takes the Quincy statues dispute, it would be the first time the court has considered a case on point since the U.S. Supreme Court’s Kennedy decision.

This story was first published by the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, and has been adapted by CNA.

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Teachers and coaches describe experiences

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Suggestions from faith leaders

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read More
New York prosecutor drops charges against suspect in bloody assault on pro-life advocate

Catholic pro-life activist Savannah Craven Antao was assaulted in New York City on Thursday, April 3, 2025, while conducting a video interview with a pro-abortion advocate.  / Credit: Photo courtesy of Savannah Craven Antao

CNA Staff, Sep 26, 2025 / 10:37 am (CNA).

The suspect in the violent assault of a pro-life advocate in New York City earlier this year will not face charges after a prosecutor’s office dropped the case against the alleged assailant.

The Thomas More Society said this week it was launching a civil lawsuit against Brianna Rivers over her alleged assault of Savannah Craven Antao after Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg dismissed the case.

Rivers struck Antao in the face and left her bloodied in the April assault in Manhattan. The assault, which was caught on camera, came as Antao was calmly interviewing Rivers and debating pro-life politics with her.

Antao told CNA in April that she “had absolutely no time to see that it was coming.”

“I regularly do street interviews for my YouTube channel and various other organizations,” she said at the time. “This isn’t something I’m not used to doing. It was just like any other day.”

Antao’s injuries required a trip to the hospital and stitches. The Thomas More Society this week said the hospital visit resulted in $3,000 worth of bills.

Christopher Ferrara, a senior lawyer with the Thomas More Society, said this week that Bragg’s dismissal of the charges “only works to undermine confidence in the system, especially when our political climate has become as fraught as it is now.”

“Failing to prosecute these clear-cut charges sets a dangerous standard for how our society responds to violence against those engaging in democratic dialogue,” he said.

Antao did not immediately respond to a request for comment from CNA on Sept. 26. In the Thomas More Society’s press release, she criticized the prosecutor’s decision to “quietly let the charges fade away” in spite of the “indisputable evidence” of the recording of the assault.

“Political violence should never be tolerated or given a free pass,” she said. “When those in power refuse to hold accountable those who respond to free speech with violence, it threatens the very fabric of our civil society.”

Bragg’s office did not immediately respond to a phone call and email seeking comment.

Ferrara said the lawsuit will seek punitive damages for Antao.

“Savannah’s assailant may have been spared criminal consequences by the Manhattan DA’s failure, but we will see to it that she faces accountability,” he said.

Read More