Lawsuit

Homeland Security Department says rule will address religious worker visa backlog #Catholic Credit: Lisa F. Young/Shutterstock Jan 14, 2026 / 10:25 am (CNA). The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said it is addressing a religious worker visa backlog with rules that will reduce wait times and disruptions in ministry for faith-based communities.“Under the leadership of Secretary [Kristi] Noem, DHS is committed to protecting and preserving freedom and expression of religion. We are taking the necessary steps to ensure religious organizations can continue delivering the services that Americans depend on,” a DHS spokesperson said in a press release Wednesday. “Pastors, priests, nuns, and rabbis are essential to the social and moral fabric of this country. We remain committed to finding ways to support and empower these organizations in their critical work.”Under the rule expected to be issued Jan. 14, religious workers in the country on R-1 visas would no longer be required to reside outside of the U.S. for a full year if they reach their statutory five-year maximum period of stay before completing their green card applications. “While R-1 religious workers are still required to depart the U.S., the rule establishes that there is no longer a minimum period of time they must reside and be physically present outside the U.S. before they seek readmission in R-1 status,” DHS said.DHS acknowledged the significant demand for visas within the EB-4 category “has exceeded the supply for many years,” citing 2023 changes implemented by President Joe Biden’s State Department. “By eliminating the one-year foreign residency requirement, USCIS [U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services] is reducing the time religious organizations are left without their trusted clergy and non-ministerial religious workers,” according to a DHS statement.The rule, expected to be issued at 11 a.m. Jan. 14, is effective immediately, DHS said.Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a press conference in December 2025 that the government would reveal its plan “early next month” for religious worker visas that would avoid giving preference to one denomination over another. Rubio noted that the plan would not favor one religion over another and that there would be “country-specific requirements depending on the country they’re coming from.” “I think we’re going to get to a good place,” Rubio said at the time. “We don’t have it ready yet. All this takes time to put together, but we’re moving quickly. I think we’ll have something positive about that at some point next month, hopefully in the early part of next month.”Visas for religious workers allow foreign nationals to work for a U.S. religious organization, through the temporary R-1 visa or a Green Card EB-4 visa, which requires at least two years of membership in the same denomination and a job offer from a qualifying nonprofit religious group.Rubio had also said in August the administration was working to create a “standalone process” for religious workers, separate from other competing applicants to the employment-based fourth preference (EB-4) category of visas that became severely backlogged after an unprecedented influx in unaccompanied minor applicants — most of which the USCIS has since alleged were fraudulent — who were added to the already-tight category under the Biden administration.In November 2025, a Catholic diocese in New Jersey dropped a lawsuit filed against the Biden administration’s State Department, Department of Homeland Security, and USCIS, citing knowledge of a solution with national implications.Since the issue of the backlogged visas started, multiple U.S. dioceses have called for a solution. Priests in the Archdiocese of Boston who are in the U.S. on visas were urged to avoid international travel amid the Trump administration’s immigration policies and deportations.Priests and other Church leaders have expressed fear of having to leave their ministries and return to their home countries, then endure lengthy wait times before coming back. Church officials have warned that a continuing backlog could lead to significant priest shortages in the United States.“We are grateful for the administration’s attention to this important issue for the Church and value the opportunity for ongoing dialogue to address these challenges so the faithful can have access to the sacraments and other essential ministries,” a spokesperson for the USCCB told CNA.
Read More

Homeland Security Department says rule will address religious worker visa backlog #Catholic Credit: Lisa F. Young/Shutterstock Jan 14, 2026 / 10:25 am (CNA). The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said it is addressing a religious worker visa backlog with rules that will reduce wait times and disruptions in ministry for faith-based communities.“Under the leadership of Secretary [Kristi] Noem, DHS is committed to protecting and preserving freedom and expression of religion. We are taking the necessary steps to ensure religious organizations can continue delivering the services that Americans depend on,” a DHS spokesperson said in a press release Wednesday. “Pastors, priests, nuns, and rabbis are essential to the social and moral fabric of this country. We remain committed to finding ways to support and empower these organizations in their critical work.”Under the rule expected to be issued Jan. 14, religious workers in the country on R-1 visas would no longer be required to reside outside of the U.S. for a full year if they reach their statutory five-year maximum period of stay before completing their green card applications. “While R-1 religious workers are still required to depart the U.S., the rule establishes that there is no longer a minimum period of time they must reside and be physically present outside the U.S. before they seek readmission in R-1 status,” DHS said.DHS acknowledged the significant demand for visas within the EB-4 category “has exceeded the supply for many years,” citing 2023 changes implemented by President Joe Biden’s State Department. “By eliminating the one-year foreign residency requirement, USCIS [U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services] is reducing the time religious organizations are left without their trusted clergy and non-ministerial religious workers,” according to a DHS statement.The rule, expected to be issued at 11 a.m. Jan. 14, is effective immediately, DHS said.Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a press conference in December 2025 that the government would reveal its plan “early next month” for religious worker visas that would avoid giving preference to one denomination over another. Rubio noted that the plan would not favor one religion over another and that there would be “country-specific requirements depending on the country they’re coming from.” “I think we’re going to get to a good place,” Rubio said at the time. “We don’t have it ready yet. All this takes time to put together, but we’re moving quickly. I think we’ll have something positive about that at some point next month, hopefully in the early part of next month.”Visas for religious workers allow foreign nationals to work for a U.S. religious organization, through the temporary R-1 visa or a Green Card EB-4 visa, which requires at least two years of membership in the same denomination and a job offer from a qualifying nonprofit religious group.Rubio had also said in August the administration was working to create a “standalone process” for religious workers, separate from other competing applicants to the employment-based fourth preference (EB-4) category of visas that became severely backlogged after an unprecedented influx in unaccompanied minor applicants — most of which the USCIS has since alleged were fraudulent — who were added to the already-tight category under the Biden administration.In November 2025, a Catholic diocese in New Jersey dropped a lawsuit filed against the Biden administration’s State Department, Department of Homeland Security, and USCIS, citing knowledge of a solution with national implications.Since the issue of the backlogged visas started, multiple U.S. dioceses have called for a solution. Priests in the Archdiocese of Boston who are in the U.S. on visas were urged to avoid international travel amid the Trump administration’s immigration policies and deportations.Priests and other Church leaders have expressed fear of having to leave their ministries and return to their home countries, then endure lengthy wait times before coming back. Church officials have warned that a continuing backlog could lead to significant priest shortages in the United States.“We are grateful for the administration’s attention to this important issue for the Church and value the opportunity for ongoing dialogue to address these challenges so the faithful can have access to the sacraments and other essential ministries,” a spokesperson for the USCCB told CNA.

unitedyam

Credit: Lisa F. Young/Shutterstock

Jan 14, 2026 / 10:25 am (CNA).

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said it is addressing a religious worker visa backlog with rules that will reduce wait times and disruptions in ministry for faith-based communities.

“Under the leadership of Secretary [Kristi] Noem, DHS is committed to protecting and preserving freedom and expression of religion. We are taking the necessary steps to ensure religious organizations can continue delivering the services that Americans depend on,” a DHS spokesperson said in a press release Wednesday. “Pastors, priests, nuns, and rabbis are essential to the social and moral fabric of this country. We remain committed to finding ways to support and empower these organizations in their critical work.”

Under the rule expected to be issued Jan. 14, religious workers in the country on R-1 visas would no longer be required to reside outside of the U.S. for a full year if they reach their statutory five-year maximum period of stay before completing their green card applications.

“While R-1 religious workers are still required to depart the U.S., the rule establishes that there is no longer a minimum period of time they must reside and be physically present outside the U.S. before they seek readmission in R-1 status,” DHS said.

DHS acknowledged the significant demand for visas within the EB-4 category “has exceeded the supply for many years,” citing 2023 changes implemented by President Joe Biden’s State Department. “By eliminating the one-year foreign residency requirement, USCIS [U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services] is reducing the time religious organizations are left without their trusted clergy and non-ministerial religious workers,” according to a DHS statement.

The rule, expected to be issued at 11 a.m. Jan. 14, is effective immediately, DHS said.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a press conference in December 2025 that the government would reveal its plan “early next month” for religious worker visas that would avoid giving preference to one denomination over another. Rubio noted that the plan would not favor one religion over another and that there would be “country-specific requirements depending on the country they’re coming from.” 

“I think we’re going to get to a good place,” Rubio said at the time. “We don’t have it ready yet. All this takes time to put together, but we’re moving quickly. I think we’ll have something positive about that at some point next month, hopefully in the early part of next month.”

Visas for religious workers allow foreign nationals to work for a U.S. religious organization, through the temporary R-1 visa or a Green Card EB-4 visa, which requires at least two years of membership in the same denomination and a job offer from a qualifying nonprofit religious group.

Rubio had also said in August the administration was working to create a “standalone process” for religious workers, separate from other competing applicants to the employment-based fourth preference (EB-4) category of visas that became severely backlogged after an unprecedented influx in unaccompanied minor applicants — most of which the USCIS has since alleged were fraudulent — who were added to the already-tight category under the Biden administration.

In November 2025, a Catholic diocese in New Jersey dropped a lawsuit filed against the Biden administration’s State Department, Department of Homeland Security, and USCIS, citing knowledge of a solution with national implications.

Since the issue of the backlogged visas started, multiple U.S. dioceses have called for a solution. Priests in the Archdiocese of Boston who are in the U.S. on visas were urged to avoid international travel amid the Trump administration’s immigration policies and deportations.

Priests and other Church leaders have expressed fear of having to leave their ministries and return to their home countries, then endure lengthy wait times before coming back. Church officials have warned that a continuing backlog could lead to significant priest shortages in the United States.

“We are grateful for the administration’s attention to this important issue for the Church and value the opportunity for ongoing dialogue to address these challenges so the faithful can have access to the sacraments and other essential ministries,” a spokesperson for the USCCB told CNA.

Read More
2025 saw expanded access to physician-assisted suicide  #Catholic Empty wheelchairs used during the Nov. 4, 2025, anti-assisted suicide event in Rome. / Credit: Courtesy of ProVita & Famiglia Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 28, 2025 / 07:00 am (CNA). Despite opposition from advocacy groups and Catholic leaders, multiple states and countries advanced legislation in 2025 to expand access to physician-assisted suicide.Delaware Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer signed a bill in May legalizing physician-assisted suicide for terminally ill adults with a prognosis of six months or less to live. The law will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2026, allowing patients to self-administer lethal medication. After the bill was signed, several disability and patient advocacy groups filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Delaware on Dec. 8 alleging that the law discriminates against people with disabilities. Illinois The House passed a bill in May to legalize physician-assisted suicide in Illinois, and it stalled in the Senate during the regular session. After it was taken up during the fall veto session, senators passed it on Oct. 31. The bill, which allows doctors to give terminally ill patients life-ending drugs if they request them, was signed into law by Gov. JB Pritzker on Dec. 12. The law “ignores the very real failures in access to quality care that drive vulnerable people to despair,” according to the Catholic Conference of Illinois.Illinois joined states that permit the practice including California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia.New York The New York State Assembly advanced an assisted suicide measure in May, which Cardinal Timothy Dolan called “a disaster waiting to happen.” Despite calls from Catholic bishops, the New York Legislature passed the “Medical Aid in Dying Act” in June.The legislation is expected to be signed by New York Gov. Kathy Hochul.ColoradoAssisted suicide has been legal in Colorado since 2016. In June 2025, a coalition of advocacy groups sued the state over its assisted suicide law, claiming the statute is unconstitutional for allegedly discriminating against those who suffer from disabilities. The suit was filed on June 30 in U.S. district court by organizations including Not Dead Yet and the Institute for Patients’ Rights. It calls Colorado’s assisted suicide regime “a deadly and discriminatory system that steers people with life-threatening disabilities away from necessary lifesaving and preserving mental health care.” FranceThe National Assembly approved a bill in May that would allow certain terminally ill adults to receive lethal medication. The bill passed with 305 votes in favor and 199 against. In a statement released after the vote, the French Bishops’ Conference expressed its “deep concern” over the so-called “right to assistance in dying.” United KingdomBritish lawmakers in the House of Commons passed a bill in June to legalize assisted suicide for terminally ill patients in England and Wales. In order to become law, the bill must pass the second chamber of Parliament, the unelected House of Lords. The Lords can amend legislation, but because the bill has the support of the Commons, it is likely to pass.Uruguay Legislators in Uruguay passed a bill in August to legalize euthanasia in the country. In October, Uruguay’s Parliament approved the “Dignified Death Bill,” making the bill law and allowing adults in the terminal stage of a disease to request euthanasia. Canada A Cardus Health report released in September found the legalization of medical assistance in dying (MAID) in Canada led to disproportionately high rates of premature deaths among vulnerable groups.MAID passed in 2012 with safeguards and provisions that the report said Canada has not upheld. It said: “Those who died from MAID were more likely to have been living with a disability than those who did not die from MAID, even though both groups had similar medical conditions and experienced diminished capability.”People suffering from mental illness are also dying by assisted suicide at disproportionate rates, the report said. 
Read More

2025 saw expanded access to physician-assisted suicide  #Catholic Empty wheelchairs used during the Nov. 4, 2025, anti-assisted suicide event in Rome. / Credit: Courtesy of ProVita & Famiglia Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 28, 2025 / 07:00 am (CNA). Despite opposition from advocacy groups and Catholic leaders, multiple states and countries advanced legislation in 2025 to expand access to physician-assisted suicide.Delaware Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer signed a bill in May legalizing physician-assisted suicide for terminally ill adults with a prognosis of six months or less to live. The law will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2026, allowing patients to self-administer lethal medication. After the bill was signed, several disability and patient advocacy groups filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Delaware on Dec. 8 alleging that the law discriminates against people with disabilities. Illinois The House passed a bill in May to legalize physician-assisted suicide in Illinois, and it stalled in the Senate during the regular session. After it was taken up during the fall veto session, senators passed it on Oct. 31. The bill, which allows doctors to give terminally ill patients life-ending drugs if they request them, was signed into law by Gov. JB Pritzker on Dec. 12. The law “ignores the very real failures in access to quality care that drive vulnerable people to despair,” according to the Catholic Conference of Illinois.Illinois joined states that permit the practice including California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia.New York The New York State Assembly advanced an assisted suicide measure in May, which Cardinal Timothy Dolan called “a disaster waiting to happen.” Despite calls from Catholic bishops, the New York Legislature passed the “Medical Aid in Dying Act” in June.The legislation is expected to be signed by New York Gov. Kathy Hochul.ColoradoAssisted suicide has been legal in Colorado since 2016. In June 2025, a coalition of advocacy groups sued the state over its assisted suicide law, claiming the statute is unconstitutional for allegedly discriminating against those who suffer from disabilities. The suit was filed on June 30 in U.S. district court by organizations including Not Dead Yet and the Institute for Patients’ Rights. It calls Colorado’s assisted suicide regime “a deadly and discriminatory system that steers people with life-threatening disabilities away from necessary lifesaving and preserving mental health care.” FranceThe National Assembly approved a bill in May that would allow certain terminally ill adults to receive lethal medication. The bill passed with 305 votes in favor and 199 against. In a statement released after the vote, the French Bishops’ Conference expressed its “deep concern” over the so-called “right to assistance in dying.” United KingdomBritish lawmakers in the House of Commons passed a bill in June to legalize assisted suicide for terminally ill patients in England and Wales. In order to become law, the bill must pass the second chamber of Parliament, the unelected House of Lords. The Lords can amend legislation, but because the bill has the support of the Commons, it is likely to pass.Uruguay Legislators in Uruguay passed a bill in August to legalize euthanasia in the country. In October, Uruguay’s Parliament approved the “Dignified Death Bill,” making the bill law and allowing adults in the terminal stage of a disease to request euthanasia. Canada A Cardus Health report released in September found the legalization of medical assistance in dying (MAID) in Canada led to disproportionately high rates of premature deaths among vulnerable groups.MAID passed in 2012 with safeguards and provisions that the report said Canada has not upheld. It said: “Those who died from MAID were more likely to have been living with a disability than those who did not die from MAID, even though both groups had similar medical conditions and experienced diminished capability.”People suffering from mental illness are also dying by assisted suicide at disproportionate rates, the report said. 

unitedyam

Empty wheelchairs used during the Nov. 4, 2025, anti-assisted suicide event in Rome. / Credit: Courtesy of ProVita & Famiglia

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 28, 2025 / 07:00 am (CNA).

Despite opposition from advocacy groups and Catholic leaders, multiple states and countries advanced legislation in 2025 to expand access to physician-assisted suicide.

Delaware 

Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer signed a bill in May legalizing physician-assisted suicide for terminally ill adults with a prognosis of six months or less to live. The law will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2026, allowing patients to self-administer lethal medication. 

After the bill was signed, several disability and patient advocacy groups filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Delaware on Dec. 8 alleging that the law discriminates against people with disabilities. 

Illinois 

The House passed a bill in May to legalize physician-assisted suicide in Illinois, and it stalled in the Senate during the regular session. After it was taken up during the fall veto session, senators passed it on Oct. 31. 

The bill, which allows doctors to give terminally ill patients life-ending drugs if they request them, was signed into law by Gov. JB Pritzker on Dec. 12. The law “ignores the very real failures in access to quality care that drive vulnerable people to despair,” according to the Catholic Conference of Illinois.

Illinois joined states that permit the practice including California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia.

New York 

The New York State Assembly advanced an assisted suicide measure in May, which Cardinal Timothy Dolan called “a disaster waiting to happen.” Despite calls from Catholic bishops, the New York Legislature passed the “Medical Aid in Dying Act” in June.

The legislation is expected to be signed by New York Gov. Kathy Hochul.

Colorado

Assisted suicide has been legal in Colorado since 2016. In June 2025, a coalition of advocacy groups sued the state over its assisted suicide law, claiming the statute is unconstitutional for allegedly discriminating against those who suffer from disabilities. 

The suit was filed on June 30 in U.S. district court by organizations including Not Dead Yet and the Institute for Patients’ Rights. It calls Colorado’s assisted suicide regime “a deadly and discriminatory system that steers people with life-threatening disabilities away from necessary lifesaving and preserving mental health care.” 

France

The National Assembly approved a bill in May that would allow certain terminally ill adults to receive lethal medication. The bill passed with 305 votes in favor and 199 against. 

In a statement released after the vote, the French Bishops’ Conference expressed its “deep concern” over the so-called “right to assistance in dying.” 

United Kingdom

British lawmakers in the House of Commons passed a bill in June to legalize assisted suicide for terminally ill patients in England and Wales. 

In order to become law, the bill must pass the second chamber of Parliament, the unelected House of Lords. The Lords can amend legislation, but because the bill has the support of the Commons, it is likely to pass.

Uruguay 

Legislators in Uruguay passed a bill in August to legalize euthanasia in the country. In October, Uruguay’s Parliament approved the “Dignified Death Bill,” making the bill law and allowing adults in the terminal stage of a disease to request euthanasia. 

Canada 

A Cardus Health report released in September found the legalization of medical assistance in dying (MAID) in Canada led to disproportionately high rates of premature deaths among vulnerable groups.

MAID passed in 2012 with safeguards and provisions that the report said Canada has not upheld. It said: “Those who died from MAID were more likely to have been living with a disability than those who did not die from MAID, even though both groups had similar medical conditions and experienced diminished capability.”

People suffering from mental illness are also dying by assisted suicide at disproportionate rates, the report said. 

Read More
Federal judge strikes down rules allowing schools to hide gender ‘transitions’ from parents #Catholic null / Credit: sergign/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Dec 23, 2025 / 10:07 am (CNA). A federal judge in California this week issued a permanent block against the state’s “gender secrecy policies” that have allowed schools to hide children’s so-called “gender transitions” from their parents.U.S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez issued the ruling in the class action lawsuit on Dec. 22, holding that parents “have a right” to the “gender information” of their children, while teachers themselves also possess the right to provide parents with that information. The order strikes down secretive policies in school districts across California that allowed schools to conceal when a child began identifying as the opposite sex or another LGBT-related identity. Benitez had allowed the legal dispute to proceed as a class action lawsuit in October. School districts in California “are ultimately state agents under state control,” the judge said at the time, and the issue of settling “statewide policy” meant the class action structure would be “superior to numerous individual actions by individual parents and teachers.” The case, Benitez said on Dec. 22, concerns “a parent’s rights to information … against a public school’s policy of secrecy when it comes to a student’s gender identification.” Parents, he said, have a right to such information on grounds of the 14th and First Amendments, he said, while teachers can assert similar First Amendment rights in sharing that information with parents. Teachers have historically informed parents of “physical injuries or questions about a student’s health and well-being,” the judge pointed out, yet lawmakers in California have enacted policies “prohibiting public school teachers from informing parents” when their child claims to have an LGBT identity. “Even if [the government] could demonstrate that excluding parents was good policy on some level, such a policy cannot be implemented at the expense of parents’ constitutional rights,” Benitez wrote. The Thomas More Society, a religious liberty legal group, said in a press release that the decision “protects all California parents, students, and teachers” and “restores sanity and common sense.”School officials in California who work to conceal “gender identity” decisions from parents “should cease all enforcement or face severe legal consequences,” attorney Paul Jonna said in the release. Elizabeth Mirabelli and Lori Ann West, the Christian teachers who originally brought the suit, said they were “profoundly grateful” for the decision. “This victory is not just ours. It is a win for honesty, transparency, and the fundamental rights of teachers and parents,” they said. The Thomas More Society said on Dec. 22 that California officials had gone to “extreme lengths” to “evade responsibility” for their policies, up to and including claiming that the gender secrecy rules were no longer enforced even as they were allegedly continuing to require them. Gender- and LGBT-related school policies have come under fire over the past year from the White House. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in August directed U.S. states to remove gender ideology material from their curricula or else face the loss of federal funding. In February the Department of Education launched an investigation into several Virginia school districts to determine if they violated federal orders forbidding schools from supporting the so-called “transition” of children. In December, meanwhile, a Catholic school student in Virginia forced a school district to concede a lawsuit she brought alleging that her constitutional rights had been violated when the school subjected her to “extreme social pressure” to affirm transgender ideology.
Read More

Federal judge strikes down rules allowing schools to hide gender ‘transitions’ from parents #Catholic null / Credit: sergign/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Dec 23, 2025 / 10:07 am (CNA). A federal judge in California this week issued a permanent block against the state’s “gender secrecy policies” that have allowed schools to hide children’s so-called “gender transitions” from their parents.U.S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez issued the ruling in the class action lawsuit on Dec. 22, holding that parents “have a right” to the “gender information” of their children, while teachers themselves also possess the right to provide parents with that information. The order strikes down secretive policies in school districts across California that allowed schools to conceal when a child began identifying as the opposite sex or another LGBT-related identity. Benitez had allowed the legal dispute to proceed as a class action lawsuit in October. School districts in California “are ultimately state agents under state control,” the judge said at the time, and the issue of settling “statewide policy” meant the class action structure would be “superior to numerous individual actions by individual parents and teachers.” The case, Benitez said on Dec. 22, concerns “a parent’s rights to information … against a public school’s policy of secrecy when it comes to a student’s gender identification.” Parents, he said, have a right to such information on grounds of the 14th and First Amendments, he said, while teachers can assert similar First Amendment rights in sharing that information with parents. Teachers have historically informed parents of “physical injuries or questions about a student’s health and well-being,” the judge pointed out, yet lawmakers in California have enacted policies “prohibiting public school teachers from informing parents” when their child claims to have an LGBT identity. “Even if [the government] could demonstrate that excluding parents was good policy on some level, such a policy cannot be implemented at the expense of parents’ constitutional rights,” Benitez wrote. The Thomas More Society, a religious liberty legal group, said in a press release that the decision “protects all California parents, students, and teachers” and “restores sanity and common sense.”School officials in California who work to conceal “gender identity” decisions from parents “should cease all enforcement or face severe legal consequences,” attorney Paul Jonna said in the release. Elizabeth Mirabelli and Lori Ann West, the Christian teachers who originally brought the suit, said they were “profoundly grateful” for the decision. “This victory is not just ours. It is a win for honesty, transparency, and the fundamental rights of teachers and parents,” they said. The Thomas More Society said on Dec. 22 that California officials had gone to “extreme lengths” to “evade responsibility” for their policies, up to and including claiming that the gender secrecy rules were no longer enforced even as they were allegedly continuing to require them. Gender- and LGBT-related school policies have come under fire over the past year from the White House. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in August directed U.S. states to remove gender ideology material from their curricula or else face the loss of federal funding. In February the Department of Education launched an investigation into several Virginia school districts to determine if they violated federal orders forbidding schools from supporting the so-called “transition” of children. In December, meanwhile, a Catholic school student in Virginia forced a school district to concede a lawsuit she brought alleging that her constitutional rights had been violated when the school subjected her to “extreme social pressure” to affirm transgender ideology.

unitedyam

null / Credit: sergign/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Dec 23, 2025 / 10:07 am (CNA).

A federal judge in California this week issued a permanent block against the state’s “gender secrecy policies” that have allowed schools to hide children’s so-called “gender transitions” from their parents.

U.S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez issued the ruling in the class action lawsuit on Dec. 22, holding that parents “have a right” to the “gender information” of their children, while teachers themselves also possess the right to provide parents with that information. 

The order strikes down secretive policies in school districts across California that allowed schools to conceal when a child began identifying as the opposite sex or another LGBT-related identity. 

Benitez had allowed the legal dispute to proceed as a class action lawsuit in October. School districts in California “are ultimately state agents under state control,” the judge said at the time, and the issue of settling “statewide policy” meant the class action structure would be “superior to numerous individual actions by individual parents and teachers.” 

The case, Benitez said on Dec. 22, concerns “a parent’s rights to information … against a public school’s policy of secrecy when it comes to a student’s gender identification.” 

Parents, he said, have a right to such information on grounds of the 14th and First Amendments, he said, while teachers can assert similar First Amendment rights in sharing that information with parents. 

Teachers have historically informed parents of “physical injuries or questions about a student’s health and well-being,” the judge pointed out, yet lawmakers in California have enacted policies “prohibiting public school teachers from informing parents” when their child claims to have an LGBT identity. 

“Even if [the government] could demonstrate that excluding parents was good policy on some level, such a policy cannot be implemented at the expense of parents’ constitutional rights,” Benitez wrote. 

The Thomas More Society, a religious liberty legal group, said in a press release that the decision “protects all California parents, students, and teachers” and “restores sanity and common sense.”

School officials in California who work to conceal “gender identity” decisions from parents “should cease all enforcement or face severe legal consequences,” attorney Paul Jonna said in the release. 

Elizabeth Mirabelli and Lori Ann West, the Christian teachers who originally brought the suit, said they were “profoundly grateful” for the decision. 

“This victory is not just ours. It is a win for honesty, transparency, and the fundamental rights of teachers and parents,” they said. 

The Thomas More Society said on Dec. 22 that California officials had gone to “extreme lengths” to “evade responsibility” for their policies, up to and including claiming that the gender secrecy rules were no longer enforced even as they were allegedly continuing to require them. 

Gender- and LGBT-related school policies have come under fire over the past year from the White House. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in August directed U.S. states to remove gender ideology material from their curricula or else face the loss of federal funding. 

In February the Department of Education launched an investigation into several Virginia school districts to determine if they violated federal orders forbidding schools from supporting the so-called “transition” of children. 

In December, meanwhile, a Catholic school student in Virginia forced a school district to concede a lawsuit she brought alleging that her constitutional rights had been violated when the school subjected her to “extreme social pressure” to affirm transgender ideology.

Read More
Massachusetts removes LGBT ideology requirements for foster care parents #Catholic null / Credit: New Africa/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Dec 19, 2025 / 12:54 pm (CNA). Massachusetts will no longer require prospective foster parents to affirm gender ideology in order to qualify for fostering children, with the move coming after a federal lawsuit from a religious liberty group. Alliance Defending Freedom said Dec. 17 that the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families “will no longer exclude Christian and other religious families from foster care” because of their “commonly held beliefs that boys are boys and girls are girls.”The legal group announced in September that it had filed a lawsuit in U.S. district court over the state policy, which required prospective parents to agree to affirm a child’s “sexual orientation and gender identity” before being permitted to foster. Attorney Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse said at the time that the state’s foster system was “in crisis” with more than 1,400 children awaiting placement in foster homes. Yet the state was “putting its ideological agenda ahead of the needs of these suffering kids,” Widmalm-Delphonse said.The suit had been filed on behalf of two Massachusetts families who had been licensed to serve as foster parents in the state. They had provided homes for nearly three dozen foster children between them and were “in good standing” at the time of the policy change. Yet the state policy required them to “promise to use a child’s chosen pronouns, verbally affirm a child’s gender identity contrary to biological sex, and even encourage a child to medically transition, forcing these families to speak against their core religious beliefs,” the lawsuit said. With its policy change, Massachusetts will instead require foster parents to affirm a child’s “individual identity and needs,” with the LGBT-related language having been removed from the state code. The amended language comes after President Donald Trump signed an executive order last month that aims to improve the nation’s foster care system by modernizing the current child welfare system, developing partnerships with private sector organizations, and prioritizing the participation of those with sincerely held religious beliefs. Families previously excluded by the state rule are “eager to reapply for their licenses,” Widmalm-Delphonse said on Dec. 17.The lawyer commended Massachusetts for taking a “step in the right direction,” though he said the legal group will continue its efforts until it is “positive that Massachusetts is committed to respecting religious persons and ideological diversity among foster parents.”Other authorities have made efforts in recent years to exclude parents from state child care programs on the basis of gender ideology.In July a federal appeals court ruled in a 2-1 decision that Oregon likely violated a Christian mother’s First Amendment rights by demanding that she embrace gender ideology and homosexuality in order to adopt children.In April, meanwhile, Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed legislation that would have prohibited the government from requiring parents to affirm support for gender ideology and homosexuality if they want to qualify to adopt or foster children.In contrast, Arkansas in April enacted a law to prevent adoptive agencies and foster care providers from discriminating against potential parents on account of their religious beliefs. The Arkansas law specifically prohibits the government from discriminating against parents over their refusal to accept “any government policy regarding sexual orientation or gender identity that conflicts with the person’s sincerely held religious beliefs.”
Read More

Massachusetts removes LGBT ideology requirements for foster care parents #Catholic null / Credit: New Africa/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Dec 19, 2025 / 12:54 pm (CNA). Massachusetts will no longer require prospective foster parents to affirm gender ideology in order to qualify for fostering children, with the move coming after a federal lawsuit from a religious liberty group. Alliance Defending Freedom said Dec. 17 that the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families “will no longer exclude Christian and other religious families from foster care” because of their “commonly held beliefs that boys are boys and girls are girls.”The legal group announced in September that it had filed a lawsuit in U.S. district court over the state policy, which required prospective parents to agree to affirm a child’s “sexual orientation and gender identity” before being permitted to foster. Attorney Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse said at the time that the state’s foster system was “in crisis” with more than 1,400 children awaiting placement in foster homes. Yet the state was “putting its ideological agenda ahead of the needs of these suffering kids,” Widmalm-Delphonse said.The suit had been filed on behalf of two Massachusetts families who had been licensed to serve as foster parents in the state. They had provided homes for nearly three dozen foster children between them and were “in good standing” at the time of the policy change. Yet the state policy required them to “promise to use a child’s chosen pronouns, verbally affirm a child’s gender identity contrary to biological sex, and even encourage a child to medically transition, forcing these families to speak against their core religious beliefs,” the lawsuit said. With its policy change, Massachusetts will instead require foster parents to affirm a child’s “individual identity and needs,” with the LGBT-related language having been removed from the state code. The amended language comes after President Donald Trump signed an executive order last month that aims to improve the nation’s foster care system by modernizing the current child welfare system, developing partnerships with private sector organizations, and prioritizing the participation of those with sincerely held religious beliefs. Families previously excluded by the state rule are “eager to reapply for their licenses,” Widmalm-Delphonse said on Dec. 17.The lawyer commended Massachusetts for taking a “step in the right direction,” though he said the legal group will continue its efforts until it is “positive that Massachusetts is committed to respecting religious persons and ideological diversity among foster parents.”Other authorities have made efforts in recent years to exclude parents from state child care programs on the basis of gender ideology.In July a federal appeals court ruled in a 2-1 decision that Oregon likely violated a Christian mother’s First Amendment rights by demanding that she embrace gender ideology and homosexuality in order to adopt children.In April, meanwhile, Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed legislation that would have prohibited the government from requiring parents to affirm support for gender ideology and homosexuality if they want to qualify to adopt or foster children.In contrast, Arkansas in April enacted a law to prevent adoptive agencies and foster care providers from discriminating against potential parents on account of their religious beliefs. The Arkansas law specifically prohibits the government from discriminating against parents over their refusal to accept “any government policy regarding sexual orientation or gender identity that conflicts with the person’s sincerely held religious beliefs.”

unitedyam

null / Credit: New Africa/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Dec 19, 2025 / 12:54 pm (CNA).

Massachusetts will no longer require prospective foster parents to affirm gender ideology in order to qualify for fostering children, with the move coming after a federal lawsuit from a religious liberty group. 

Alliance Defending Freedom said Dec. 17 that the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families “will no longer exclude Christian and other religious families from foster care” because of their “commonly held beliefs that boys are boys and girls are girls.”

The legal group announced in September that it had filed a lawsuit in U.S. district court over the state policy, which required prospective parents to agree to affirm a child’s “sexual orientation and gender identity” before being permitted to foster. 

Attorney Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse said at the time that the state’s foster system was “in crisis” with more than 1,400 children awaiting placement in foster homes. 

Yet the state was “putting its ideological agenda ahead of the needs of these suffering kids,” Widmalm-Delphonse said.

The suit had been filed on behalf of two Massachusetts families who had been licensed to serve as foster parents in the state. They had provided homes for nearly three dozen foster children between them and were “in good standing” at the time of the policy change. 

Yet the state policy required them to “promise to use a child’s chosen pronouns, verbally affirm a child’s gender identity contrary to biological sex, and even encourage a child to medically transition, forcing these families to speak against their core religious beliefs,” the lawsuit said. 

With its policy change, Massachusetts will instead require foster parents to affirm a child’s “individual identity and needs,” with the LGBT-related language having been removed from the state code. 

The amended language comes after President Donald Trump signed an executive order last month that aims to improve the nation’s foster care system by modernizing the current child welfare system, developing partnerships with private sector organizations, and prioritizing the participation of those with sincerely held religious beliefs. 

Families previously excluded by the state rule are “eager to reapply for their licenses,” Widmalm-Delphonse said on Dec. 17.

The lawyer commended Massachusetts for taking a “step in the right direction,” though he said the legal group will continue its efforts until it is “positive that Massachusetts is committed to respecting religious persons and ideological diversity among foster parents.”

Other authorities have made efforts in recent years to exclude parents from state child care programs on the basis of gender ideology.

In July a federal appeals court ruled in a 2-1 decision that Oregon likely violated a Christian mother’s First Amendment rights by demanding that she embrace gender ideology and homosexuality in order to adopt children.

In April, meanwhile, Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed legislation that would have prohibited the government from requiring parents to affirm support for gender ideology and homosexuality if they want to qualify to adopt or foster children.

In contrast, Arkansas in April enacted a law to prevent adoptive agencies and foster care providers from discriminating against potential parents on account of their religious beliefs. 

The Arkansas law specifically prohibits the government from discriminating against parents over their refusal to accept “any government policy regarding sexual orientation or gender identity that conflicts with the person’s sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Read More
Albany’s retired bishop files for personal bankruptcy #Catholic Bishop Edward Scarfenberger. / Credit: Photo courtesy of the Diocese of Albany National Catholic Register, Dec 19, 2025 / 12:24 pm (CNA). A retired New York bishop has filed for personal bankruptcy protection in federal court after a state jury verdict found him, along with other officials, personally liable for the collapse of a Catholic hospital pension fund that left about 1,100 retirees without the lifetime monthly payments they were expecting.It’s not clear whether a Catholic bishop in the United States has ever previously filed for personal bankruptcy protection.Bishop Edward Scharfenberger, 77, who served as bishop of Albany from April 2014 until his retirement in October, is seeking protection from creditors for his assets valued at between $100,001 and $500,000, according to a filing Tuesday in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York.The seven-page filing does not list the bishop’s assets but states that he has between 100 and 199 creditors and debts totaling between $1,000,001 and $10 million.Last week, a jury found Scharfenberger 10% liable in a $54.2 million judgment in a civil lawsuit over the failed pension plan once provided by St. Clare’s Hospital in Schenectady, a Catholic hospital that operated from 1949 until 2008, according to The Evangelist, the diocese’s newspaper.The verdict and judgment, issued Dec. 12, cover compensatory damages — the amount a court finds is owed to plaintiffs for harm they have suffered — but not punitive damages, which may be added in cases of recklessness, malice, or fraud. The bankruptcy filings by the bishop and another defendant in the state lawsuit over the pension plan failure forced a pause in a punitive damages hearing earlier this week, according to WNYT Channel 13 in Albany.The National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, was unable to reach Scharfenberger before the publication of this story. A lawyer representing the bishop acknowledged a request for comment Dec. 17 but did not immediately provide one.A rare personal bankruptcyIn recent decades, bankruptcies have occurred regularly in the Catholic Church in the United States. Between 2004 and November 2025, 39 of the country’s dioceses have filed for bankruptcy, almost all to protect assets from clergy sex-abuse lawsuits, as the Register reported last month. One of those is the Diocese of Albany, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2023. But those diocesan cases were filed under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, which allows a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship to reorganize and continue operating while developing a court-approved plan to repay creditors.Scharfenberger filed under Chapter 13, which allows an individual with regular income who cannot pay debts to keep certain assets while working out a repayment plan. “The rules in Chapter 13 permit a debtor to keep property and confirm a plan with payments to creditors based on the debtor’s ‘disposable income,’” said Marie Reilly, a bankruptcy expert and law professor at Penn State Dickinson Law, in an email. “If the debtor commits his disposable income to paying creditors for the term of a three- to five-year plan, he gets a discharge (forgiveness) of the unpaid balance.”Reilly, who has researched several dozen diocesan bankruptcies for The Catholic Project, a lay initiative of The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., told the Register that the bankruptcy filing does not necessarily solve all of the bishop’s money problems.“There are exceptions — some debts don’t get discharged. Creditors can object to the plan if it does not meet the statutory requirements,” Reilly said. “And, it is possible that the pension fund creditor may move to dismiss the bishop’s Chapter 13 case as having been filed ‘in bad faith.’”$50 million shortfall St. Clare’s Hospital was originally run by the Franciscan Sisters of the Poor. The Diocese of Albany maintains that it never owned the hospital and that the bishop of Albany merely provided “canonical oversight” to make sure the hospital met “its mission to serve all in accord with Catholic moral standards,” according to an August 2025 statement from the diocese.Last week, the jury found that the Diocese of Albany has no liability for the pension failure, instead holding the hospital corporation and certain officers and board members accountable. In addition to Scharfenberger, the jury found two deceased employees of the diocese liable, according to The Evangelist: Former Albany Bishop Howard Hubbard (1938–2023), who led the diocese from 1977 to 2014, was found 20% liable; and Father David LeFort, a former vicar general of the diocese who died in August 2023, was found 5% liable. Also found liable were St. Clare’s Corporation (20%), St. Clare’s president Joseph Pofit (25%), and former St. Clare’s president Robert Perry (20%), according to The Evangelist.The judgments stem from a pension plan that operated for about 60 years. In 1959, the hospital began offering employees a defined-benefit plan that provided a lifetime monthly pension after retirement.Church plan exempt from ERISALike most plans operated by Catholic institutions, the pension plan had a religious exemption from the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (known as ERISA), which sets minimum funding requirements for most nonreligious pension plans and also enables the federal government to step in and make payments to retirees of failed plans, using a fund financed by covered pension plans.When the hospital closed in 2008, the officers of St. Clare’s “determined that the corporation would continue to exist for purposes of administering the pension plan,” according to a complaint filed in state court in Schenectady County by the New York attorney general’s office in May 2022. “They also chose to continue treating the pension plan as a ‘Church plan’ — which it could do only if the corporation’s former employees and pensioners were designated as employees of the Church. This was all in order to avoid the contribution and insurance requirements of ERISA, and the duties imposed by ERISA upon corporation directors and trustees as fiduciaries,” the complaint states.The bishop of Albany was automatically a member of the hospital’s board and served as its honorary chairman, and had authority to appoint most of the directors on the board, according to the state attorney general’s complaint.The attorney general’s office alleged that St. Clare’s Corporation failed to make contributions to the pension fund “for all but three years from 2001 to 2019” and concealed from retirees “the insolvency of the pension plan.”In 2018, the St. Clare’s board terminated the pension plan effective Feb. 1, 2019, because of an approximately $50 million shortfall. More than 1,100 employees lost retirement benefits, including about 650 who lost all pension payments and about 450 who received a lump-sum payment “equal to 70% of the value of their vested pension,” the complaint states. The retired employees include “nurses, lab technicians, social workers, EMTs, orderlies, housekeepers, and other essential workers” who worked at the hospital “between 10 and 50 years,” the complaint states.Testimony and reactionOn Dec. 9 during the civil trial, Scharfenberger testified that during his tenure no boards he sat on ever discussed the hospital’s pension plan, according to The Times-Union of Albany. In a written statement issued in August, when Scharfenberger still led the Diocese of Albany, the diocese said the bishop “has actively sought ways to help the pensioners” while denying that the diocese ever “exercised any control over St. Clare’s Hospital operations or its pension.” “He hosted a listening session with pensioners at Siena College to identify issues and consider ways to help those in need. He also reached out to the Mother Cabrini Foundation to try to secure funding for the pensioners, but that effort was unable to move forward once the pensioners filed the lawsuit,” the statement said. “The diocese is eager to see the case move forward and promptly resolved,” the August statement continued. “Our prayers continue for all who are struggling in any way, and as we stated previously, our offer to connect those in need with services that can help, stands. No one should walk alone.”His successor, Bishop Mark O’Connell, who was installed as bishop of Albany on Dec. 5, told reporters shortly before the verdict was announced last week: “I care deeply about their hurt [and] not having their pensions,” according to The Evangelist.During the Dec. 12 press conference, when a reporter asked O’Connell what the diocese would do if the jury found the diocese liable for the pension fund collapse, the bishop noted that the diocese is already in the midst of a bankruptcy process.“If we are liable, then we’ll do what we can to make amends, given that they are one creditor as a group among many people accusing the Diocese of Albany,” O’Connell said, according to WAMC Northeast Public Radio. “And that’s what bankruptcy process is. We obviously cannot pay a billion dollars. Right? So that’s what Chapter 11 is all about, to figure out what’s fair. And since you have a bankruptcy judge and mediators, it’s not up to us.”Later that day, the jury found the diocese not liable in the pension fund collapse lawsuit. The diocese issued a written statement, according to The Evangelist, that said: “As grateful as we are for the jury’s informed decision, we are still very much aware of the hurt felt by the St. Clare’s pensioners who cared for the sick and the poor throughout the long history of St. Clare’s Hospital. This does not mean that we will turn our backs to the pensioners, for as Bishop O’Connell has noted, they are a part of our flock; they are still in need of healing.”That same day, lead plaintiff Mary Hartshorne, who worked in the hospital’s radiology department for about 28 years, told WNYT Channel 13 in Albany that she and other hospital retirees were pleased with the jury’s verdict but did not feel they would be made whole.“We’ve been playing this game for seven and a half years, and I think my question I ask everybody is: How do you get that back? You don’t,” she said.This story was first published by the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, and has been adapted by CNA.
Read More

Albany’s retired bishop files for personal bankruptcy #Catholic Bishop Edward Scarfenberger. / Credit: Photo courtesy of the Diocese of Albany National Catholic Register, Dec 19, 2025 / 12:24 pm (CNA). A retired New York bishop has filed for personal bankruptcy protection in federal court after a state jury verdict found him, along with other officials, personally liable for the collapse of a Catholic hospital pension fund that left about 1,100 retirees without the lifetime monthly payments they were expecting.It’s not clear whether a Catholic bishop in the United States has ever previously filed for personal bankruptcy protection.Bishop Edward Scharfenberger, 77, who served as bishop of Albany from April 2014 until his retirement in October, is seeking protection from creditors for his assets valued at between $100,001 and $500,000, according to a filing Tuesday in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York.The seven-page filing does not list the bishop’s assets but states that he has between 100 and 199 creditors and debts totaling between $1,000,001 and $10 million.Last week, a jury found Scharfenberger 10% liable in a $54.2 million judgment in a civil lawsuit over the failed pension plan once provided by St. Clare’s Hospital in Schenectady, a Catholic hospital that operated from 1949 until 2008, according to The Evangelist, the diocese’s newspaper.The verdict and judgment, issued Dec. 12, cover compensatory damages — the amount a court finds is owed to plaintiffs for harm they have suffered — but not punitive damages, which may be added in cases of recklessness, malice, or fraud. The bankruptcy filings by the bishop and another defendant in the state lawsuit over the pension plan failure forced a pause in a punitive damages hearing earlier this week, according to WNYT Channel 13 in Albany.The National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, was unable to reach Scharfenberger before the publication of this story. A lawyer representing the bishop acknowledged a request for comment Dec. 17 but did not immediately provide one.A rare personal bankruptcyIn recent decades, bankruptcies have occurred regularly in the Catholic Church in the United States. Between 2004 and November 2025, 39 of the country’s dioceses have filed for bankruptcy, almost all to protect assets from clergy sex-abuse lawsuits, as the Register reported last month. One of those is the Diocese of Albany, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2023. But those diocesan cases were filed under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, which allows a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship to reorganize and continue operating while developing a court-approved plan to repay creditors.Scharfenberger filed under Chapter 13, which allows an individual with regular income who cannot pay debts to keep certain assets while working out a repayment plan. “The rules in Chapter 13 permit a debtor to keep property and confirm a plan with payments to creditors based on the debtor’s ‘disposable income,’” said Marie Reilly, a bankruptcy expert and law professor at Penn State Dickinson Law, in an email. “If the debtor commits his disposable income to paying creditors for the term of a three- to five-year plan, he gets a discharge (forgiveness) of the unpaid balance.”Reilly, who has researched several dozen diocesan bankruptcies for The Catholic Project, a lay initiative of The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., told the Register that the bankruptcy filing does not necessarily solve all of the bishop’s money problems.“There are exceptions — some debts don’t get discharged. Creditors can object to the plan if it does not meet the statutory requirements,” Reilly said. “And, it is possible that the pension fund creditor may move to dismiss the bishop’s Chapter 13 case as having been filed ‘in bad faith.’”$50 million shortfall St. Clare’s Hospital was originally run by the Franciscan Sisters of the Poor. The Diocese of Albany maintains that it never owned the hospital and that the bishop of Albany merely provided “canonical oversight” to make sure the hospital met “its mission to serve all in accord with Catholic moral standards,” according to an August 2025 statement from the diocese.Last week, the jury found that the Diocese of Albany has no liability for the pension failure, instead holding the hospital corporation and certain officers and board members accountable. In addition to Scharfenberger, the jury found two deceased employees of the diocese liable, according to The Evangelist: Former Albany Bishop Howard Hubbard (1938–2023), who led the diocese from 1977 to 2014, was found 20% liable; and Father David LeFort, a former vicar general of the diocese who died in August 2023, was found 5% liable. Also found liable were St. Clare’s Corporation (20%), St. Clare’s president Joseph Pofit (25%), and former St. Clare’s president Robert Perry (20%), according to The Evangelist.The judgments stem from a pension plan that operated for about 60 years. In 1959, the hospital began offering employees a defined-benefit plan that provided a lifetime monthly pension after retirement.Church plan exempt from ERISALike most plans operated by Catholic institutions, the pension plan had a religious exemption from the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (known as ERISA), which sets minimum funding requirements for most nonreligious pension plans and also enables the federal government to step in and make payments to retirees of failed plans, using a fund financed by covered pension plans.When the hospital closed in 2008, the officers of St. Clare’s “determined that the corporation would continue to exist for purposes of administering the pension plan,” according to a complaint filed in state court in Schenectady County by the New York attorney general’s office in May 2022. “They also chose to continue treating the pension plan as a ‘Church plan’ — which it could do only if the corporation’s former employees and pensioners were designated as employees of the Church. This was all in order to avoid the contribution and insurance requirements of ERISA, and the duties imposed by ERISA upon corporation directors and trustees as fiduciaries,” the complaint states.The bishop of Albany was automatically a member of the hospital’s board and served as its honorary chairman, and had authority to appoint most of the directors on the board, according to the state attorney general’s complaint.The attorney general’s office alleged that St. Clare’s Corporation failed to make contributions to the pension fund “for all but three years from 2001 to 2019” and concealed from retirees “the insolvency of the pension plan.”In 2018, the St. Clare’s board terminated the pension plan effective Feb. 1, 2019, because of an approximately $50 million shortfall. More than 1,100 employees lost retirement benefits, including about 650 who lost all pension payments and about 450 who received a lump-sum payment “equal to 70% of the value of their vested pension,” the complaint states. The retired employees include “nurses, lab technicians, social workers, EMTs, orderlies, housekeepers, and other essential workers” who worked at the hospital “between 10 and 50 years,” the complaint states.Testimony and reactionOn Dec. 9 during the civil trial, Scharfenberger testified that during his tenure no boards he sat on ever discussed the hospital’s pension plan, according to The Times-Union of Albany. In a written statement issued in August, when Scharfenberger still led the Diocese of Albany, the diocese said the bishop “has actively sought ways to help the pensioners” while denying that the diocese ever “exercised any control over St. Clare’s Hospital operations or its pension.” “He hosted a listening session with pensioners at Siena College to identify issues and consider ways to help those in need. He also reached out to the Mother Cabrini Foundation to try to secure funding for the pensioners, but that effort was unable to move forward once the pensioners filed the lawsuit,” the statement said. “The diocese is eager to see the case move forward and promptly resolved,” the August statement continued. “Our prayers continue for all who are struggling in any way, and as we stated previously, our offer to connect those in need with services that can help, stands. No one should walk alone.”His successor, Bishop Mark O’Connell, who was installed as bishop of Albany on Dec. 5, told reporters shortly before the verdict was announced last week: “I care deeply about their hurt [and] not having their pensions,” according to The Evangelist.During the Dec. 12 press conference, when a reporter asked O’Connell what the diocese would do if the jury found the diocese liable for the pension fund collapse, the bishop noted that the diocese is already in the midst of a bankruptcy process.“If we are liable, then we’ll do what we can to make amends, given that they are one creditor as a group among many people accusing the Diocese of Albany,” O’Connell said, according to WAMC Northeast Public Radio. “And that’s what bankruptcy process is. We obviously cannot pay a billion dollars. Right? So that’s what Chapter 11 is all about, to figure out what’s fair. And since you have a bankruptcy judge and mediators, it’s not up to us.”Later that day, the jury found the diocese not liable in the pension fund collapse lawsuit. The diocese issued a written statement, according to The Evangelist, that said: “As grateful as we are for the jury’s informed decision, we are still very much aware of the hurt felt by the St. Clare’s pensioners who cared for the sick and the poor throughout the long history of St. Clare’s Hospital. This does not mean that we will turn our backs to the pensioners, for as Bishop O’Connell has noted, they are a part of our flock; they are still in need of healing.”That same day, lead plaintiff Mary Hartshorne, who worked in the hospital’s radiology department for about 28 years, told WNYT Channel 13 in Albany that she and other hospital retirees were pleased with the jury’s verdict but did not feel they would be made whole.“We’ve been playing this game for seven and a half years, and I think my question I ask everybody is: How do you get that back? You don’t,” she said.This story was first published by the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, and has been adapted by CNA.

unitedyam

Bishop Edward Scarfenberger. / Credit: Photo courtesy of the Diocese of Albany

National Catholic Register, Dec 19, 2025 / 12:24 pm (CNA).

A retired New York bishop has filed for personal bankruptcy protection in federal court after a state jury verdict found him, along with other officials, personally liable for the collapse of a Catholic hospital pension fund that left about 1,100 retirees without the lifetime monthly payments they were expecting.

It’s not clear whether a Catholic bishop in the United States has ever previously filed for personal bankruptcy protection.

Bishop Edward Scharfenberger, 77, who served as bishop of Albany from April 2014 until his retirement in October, is seeking protection from creditors for his assets valued at between $100,001 and $500,000, according to a filing Tuesday in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York.

The seven-page filing does not list the bishop’s assets but states that he has between 100 and 199 creditors and debts totaling between $1,000,001 and $10 million.

Last week, a jury found Scharfenberger 10% liable in a $54.2 million judgment in a civil lawsuit over the failed pension plan once provided by St. Clare’s Hospital in Schenectady, a Catholic hospital that operated from 1949 until 2008, according to The Evangelist, the diocese’s newspaper.

The verdict and judgment, issued Dec. 12, cover compensatory damages — the amount a court finds is owed to plaintiffs for harm they have suffered — but not punitive damages, which may be added in cases of recklessness, malice, or fraud. The bankruptcy filings by the bishop and another defendant in the state lawsuit over the pension plan failure forced a pause in a punitive damages hearing earlier this week, according to WNYT Channel 13 in Albany.

The National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, was unable to reach Scharfenberger before the publication of this story. A lawyer representing the bishop acknowledged a request for comment Dec. 17 but did not immediately provide one.

A rare personal bankruptcy

In recent decades, bankruptcies have occurred regularly in the Catholic Church in the United States. Between 2004 and November 2025, 39 of the country’s dioceses have filed for bankruptcy, almost all to protect assets from clergy sex-abuse lawsuits, as the Register reported last month. One of those is the Diocese of Albany, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2023. 

But those diocesan cases were filed under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, which allows a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship to reorganize and continue operating while developing a court-approved plan to repay creditors.

Scharfenberger filed under Chapter 13, which allows an individual with regular income who cannot pay debts to keep certain assets while working out a repayment plan. 

“The rules in Chapter 13 permit a debtor to keep property and confirm a plan with payments to creditors based on the debtor’s ‘disposable income,’” said Marie Reilly, a bankruptcy expert and law professor at Penn State Dickinson Law, in an email. “If the debtor commits his disposable income to paying creditors for the term of a three- to five-year plan, he gets a discharge (forgiveness) of the unpaid balance.”

Reilly, who has researched several dozen diocesan bankruptcies for The Catholic Project, a lay initiative of The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., told the Register that the bankruptcy filing does not necessarily solve all of the bishop’s money problems.

“There are exceptions — some debts don’t get discharged. Creditors can object to the plan if it does not meet the statutory requirements,” Reilly said. “And, it is possible that the pension fund creditor may move to dismiss the bishop’s Chapter 13 case as having been filed ‘in bad faith.’”

$50 million shortfall 

St. Clare’s Hospital was originally run by the Franciscan Sisters of the Poor. The Diocese of Albany maintains that it never owned the hospital and that the bishop of Albany merely provided “canonical oversight” to make sure the hospital met “its mission to serve all in accord with Catholic moral standards,” according to an August 2025 statement from the diocese.

Last week, the jury found that the Diocese of Albany has no liability for the pension failure, instead holding the hospital corporation and certain officers and board members accountable. 

In addition to Scharfenberger, the jury found two deceased employees of the diocese liable, according to The Evangelist: Former Albany Bishop Howard Hubbard (1938–2023), who led the diocese from 1977 to 2014, was found 20% liable; and Father David LeFort, a former vicar general of the diocese who died in August 2023, was found 5% liable. 

Also found liable were St. Clare’s Corporation (20%), St. Clare’s president Joseph Pofit (25%), and former St. Clare’s president Robert Perry (20%), according to The Evangelist.

The judgments stem from a pension plan that operated for about 60 years. 

In 1959, the hospital began offering employees a defined-benefit plan that provided a lifetime monthly pension after retirement.

Church plan exempt from ERISA

Like most plans operated by Catholic institutions, the pension plan had a religious exemption from the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (known as ERISA), which sets minimum funding requirements for most nonreligious pension plans and also enables the federal government to step in and make payments to retirees of failed plans, using a fund financed by covered pension plans.

When the hospital closed in 2008, the officers of St. Clare’s “determined that the corporation would continue to exist for purposes of administering the pension plan,” according to a complaint filed in state court in Schenectady County by the New York attorney general’s office in May 2022. 

“They also chose to continue treating the pension plan as a ‘Church plan’ — which it could do only if the corporation’s former employees and pensioners were designated as employees of the Church. This was all in order to avoid the contribution and insurance requirements of ERISA, and the duties imposed by ERISA upon corporation directors and trustees as fiduciaries,” the complaint states.

The bishop of Albany was automatically a member of the hospital’s board and served as its honorary chairman, and had authority to appoint most of the directors on the board, according to the state attorney general’s complaint.

The attorney general’s office alleged that St. Clare’s Corporation failed to make contributions to the pension fund “for all but three years from 2001 to 2019” and concealed from retirees “the insolvency of the pension plan.”

In 2018, the St. Clare’s board terminated the pension plan effective Feb. 1, 2019, because of an approximately $50 million shortfall. More than 1,100 employees lost retirement benefits, including about 650 who lost all pension payments and about 450 who received a lump-sum payment “equal to 70% of the value of their vested pension,” the complaint states. The retired employees include “nurses, lab technicians, social workers, EMTs, orderlies, housekeepers, and other essential workers” who worked at the hospital “between 10 and 50 years,” the complaint states.

Testimony and reaction

On Dec. 9 during the civil trial, Scharfenberger testified that during his tenure no boards he sat on ever discussed the hospital’s pension plan, according to The Times-Union of Albany. 

In a written statement issued in August, when Scharfenberger still led the Diocese of Albany, the diocese said the bishop “has actively sought ways to help the pensioners” while denying that the diocese ever “exercised any control over St. Clare’s Hospital operations or its pension.” 

“He hosted a listening session with pensioners at Siena College to identify issues and consider ways to help those in need. He also reached out to the Mother Cabrini Foundation to try to secure funding for the pensioners, but that effort was unable to move forward once the pensioners filed the lawsuit,” the statement said. 

“The diocese is eager to see the case move forward and promptly resolved,” the August statement continued. “Our prayers continue for all who are struggling in any way, and as we stated previously, our offer to connect those in need with services that can help, stands. No one should walk alone.”

His successor, Bishop Mark O’Connell, who was installed as bishop of Albany on Dec. 5, told reporters shortly before the verdict was announced last week: “I care deeply about their hurt [and] not having their pensions,” according to The Evangelist.

During the Dec. 12 press conference, when a reporter asked O’Connell what the diocese would do if the jury found the diocese liable for the pension fund collapse, the bishop noted that the diocese is already in the midst of a bankruptcy process.

“If we are liable, then we’ll do what we can to make amends, given that they are one creditor as a group among many people accusing the Diocese of Albany,” O’Connell said, according to WAMC Northeast Public Radio. “And that’s what bankruptcy process is. We obviously cannot pay a billion dollars. Right? So that’s what Chapter 11 is all about, to figure out what’s fair. And since you have a bankruptcy judge and mediators, it’s not up to us.”

Later that day, the jury found the diocese not liable in the pension fund collapse lawsuit. The diocese issued a written statement, according to The Evangelist, that said: “As grateful as we are for the jury’s informed decision, we are still very much aware of the hurt felt by the St. Clare’s pensioners who cared for the sick and the poor throughout the long history of St. Clare’s Hospital. This does not mean that we will turn our backs to the pensioners, for as Bishop O’Connell has noted, they are a part of our flock; they are still in need of healing.”

That same day, lead plaintiff Mary Hartshorne, who worked in the hospital’s radiology department for about 28 years, told WNYT Channel 13 in Albany that she and other hospital retirees were pleased with the jury’s verdict but did not feel they would be made whole.

“We’ve been playing this game for seven and a half years, and I think my question I ask everybody is: How do you get that back? You don’t,” she said.

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

Read More
Top 2025 religious freedom developments included mix of persecution, protection #Catholic null / Credit: Joe Belanger/Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 19, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA). Here is an overview of some of the religious freedom developments and news in the United States and abroad in 2025:White House started the Religious Liberty CommissionPresident Donald Trump established the White House Religious Liberty Commission in May to report on threats to religious freedom in the U.S. and seek to advance legal protections. The commission and advisory boards include members of various religions. Catholic members on the commission include Cardinal Timothy Dolan and Bishop Robert Barron. Catholic advisory board members include Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone, Bishop Thomas Paprocki, Bishop Kevin Rhoades, and Father Thomas Ferguson.Lawmakers condemned persecution of Christians Rep. Riley Moore, R-West Virginia, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, introduced a joint resolution condemning the persecution of Christians in Muslim-majority countries across the world.The measure called on the Trump administration to leverage trade, security negotiations, and other diplomatic tools to advocate for religious freedom. Court blocked law that would require priests to violate the seal of confessionWashington Gov. Bob Ferguson signed a state law in May that would require priests to report child abuse to authorities even if they hear about it during the sacrament of confession. Catholic bishops brought a lawsuit against the measure. A federal judge blocked the controversial law.Trump announced federal guidelines to protect prayer at public schoolsPresident Donald Trump announced the U.S. Department of Education will issue federal guidelines to protect prayer at public schools during a Sept. 8 Religious Liberty Commission hearing. He said the guidelines will “protect the right to prayer in our public schools and [provide for] its total protection.”The president said he sought the guidelines after hearing about instances of public school students and staff being censored and facing disciplinary action for engaging in prayer, reading the Bible, and publicly expressing their faith.Report found most states fail to safeguard religious liberty About three-fourths of states scored less than 50% on Napa Legal Institute’s religious freedom index, which measures how well states safeguard religious liberty for faith-based organizations. The October report was part of Napa’s Faith & Freedom Index that showed Alabama scored the highest and Michigan scored the lowest.Lawmakers urged federal court to allow Ten Commandments displayFirst Liberty Institute and Heather Gebelin Hacker of Hacker Stephens LLP filed an amicus brief in December on behalf of 46 United States lawmakers urging the federal court to allow the Ten Commandments to be displayed in public schools.Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana; Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas; and Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, R-Texas, were among the lawmakers who supported the cause after federal judges blocked Texas and Louisiana laws requiring the display of the commandments.Supreme Court ruled on religious freedom cases The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a group of Maryland parents who sued a school district over its refusal to allow families to opt their children out of reading LGBT-themed books. In a 6-3 decision on July 27 in Mahmoud v. Taylor, the court ruled the Catholic, Orthodox, and Muslim parents “are likely to succeed on their claim that the board’s policies unconstitutionally burden their religious exercise.” In July, the Supreme Court ordered the New York Court of Appeals to revisit Diocese of Albany v. Harris, which challenged a 2017 New York state mandate requiring employers to cover abortions in health insurance plans.In October, a Native American group working to stop the destruction of a centuries-old religious ritual site in Arizona lost its appeal to the Supreme Court.Religious liberty abroad: Religious freedom diminished in AfghanistanThe U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) said in a report that “religious freedom conditions in Afghanistan continue to decline dramatically under Taliban rule.”The USCIRF wrote in an Aug. 15 report examining the Taliban’s Law on the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice one year after its enactment: The morality law “impacts all Afghans” but “disproportionately affects religious minorities and women, eradicating their participation in public life and systematically eliminating their right to [freedom of religious belief].”Chinese government banned Catholic priests from evangelizing onlineIn September, the State Administration for Religious Affairs in China banned several forms of online evangelization for religious clergy of all religions, including Catholic priests.The Code of Conduct for Religious Clergy was made up of 18 articles including one that said faith leaders are banned from performing religious rituals through live broadcasts, short videos, or online meetings. U.S. commission said China should be designated as a country of particular concernThe USCIRF reported China tries to exert total control over religion and said the U.S. Department of State should redesignate China as a “country of particular concern” (CPC) regarding religious freedom.USCIRF said in September that China uses surveillance, fines, retribution against family members, imprisonment, enforced disappearance, torture, and other forms of abuse to control the Catholic Church and other religious communities in the nation.In its annual report, USCIRF also recommended Afghanistan, Burma, Cuba, Eritrea, India, Iran, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Vietnam be designated as CPCs.
Read More

Top 2025 religious freedom developments included mix of persecution, protection #Catholic null / Credit: Joe Belanger/Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 19, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA). Here is an overview of some of the religious freedom developments and news in the United States and abroad in 2025:White House started the Religious Liberty CommissionPresident Donald Trump established the White House Religious Liberty Commission in May to report on threats to religious freedom in the U.S. and seek to advance legal protections. The commission and advisory boards include members of various religions. Catholic members on the commission include Cardinal Timothy Dolan and Bishop Robert Barron. Catholic advisory board members include Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone, Bishop Thomas Paprocki, Bishop Kevin Rhoades, and Father Thomas Ferguson.Lawmakers condemned persecution of Christians Rep. Riley Moore, R-West Virginia, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, introduced a joint resolution condemning the persecution of Christians in Muslim-majority countries across the world.The measure called on the Trump administration to leverage trade, security negotiations, and other diplomatic tools to advocate for religious freedom. Court blocked law that would require priests to violate the seal of confessionWashington Gov. Bob Ferguson signed a state law in May that would require priests to report child abuse to authorities even if they hear about it during the sacrament of confession. Catholic bishops brought a lawsuit against the measure. A federal judge blocked the controversial law.Trump announced federal guidelines to protect prayer at public schoolsPresident Donald Trump announced the U.S. Department of Education will issue federal guidelines to protect prayer at public schools during a Sept. 8 Religious Liberty Commission hearing. He said the guidelines will “protect the right to prayer in our public schools and [provide for] its total protection.”The president said he sought the guidelines after hearing about instances of public school students and staff being censored and facing disciplinary action for engaging in prayer, reading the Bible, and publicly expressing their faith.Report found most states fail to safeguard religious liberty About three-fourths of states scored less than 50% on Napa Legal Institute’s religious freedom index, which measures how well states safeguard religious liberty for faith-based organizations. The October report was part of Napa’s Faith & Freedom Index that showed Alabama scored the highest and Michigan scored the lowest.Lawmakers urged federal court to allow Ten Commandments displayFirst Liberty Institute and Heather Gebelin Hacker of Hacker Stephens LLP filed an amicus brief in December on behalf of 46 United States lawmakers urging the federal court to allow the Ten Commandments to be displayed in public schools.Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana; Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas; and Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, R-Texas, were among the lawmakers who supported the cause after federal judges blocked Texas and Louisiana laws requiring the display of the commandments.Supreme Court ruled on religious freedom cases The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a group of Maryland parents who sued a school district over its refusal to allow families to opt their children out of reading LGBT-themed books. In a 6-3 decision on July 27 in Mahmoud v. Taylor, the court ruled the Catholic, Orthodox, and Muslim parents “are likely to succeed on their claim that the board’s policies unconstitutionally burden their religious exercise.” In July, the Supreme Court ordered the New York Court of Appeals to revisit Diocese of Albany v. Harris, which challenged a 2017 New York state mandate requiring employers to cover abortions in health insurance plans.In October, a Native American group working to stop the destruction of a centuries-old religious ritual site in Arizona lost its appeal to the Supreme Court.Religious liberty abroad: Religious freedom diminished in AfghanistanThe U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) said in a report that “religious freedom conditions in Afghanistan continue to decline dramatically under Taliban rule.”The USCIRF wrote in an Aug. 15 report examining the Taliban’s Law on the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice one year after its enactment: The morality law “impacts all Afghans” but “disproportionately affects religious minorities and women, eradicating their participation in public life and systematically eliminating their right to [freedom of religious belief].”Chinese government banned Catholic priests from evangelizing onlineIn September, the State Administration for Religious Affairs in China banned several forms of online evangelization for religious clergy of all religions, including Catholic priests.The Code of Conduct for Religious Clergy was made up of 18 articles including one that said faith leaders are banned from performing religious rituals through live broadcasts, short videos, or online meetings. U.S. commission said China should be designated as a country of particular concernThe USCIRF reported China tries to exert total control over religion and said the U.S. Department of State should redesignate China as a “country of particular concern” (CPC) regarding religious freedom.USCIRF said in September that China uses surveillance, fines, retribution against family members, imprisonment, enforced disappearance, torture, and other forms of abuse to control the Catholic Church and other religious communities in the nation.In its annual report, USCIRF also recommended Afghanistan, Burma, Cuba, Eritrea, India, Iran, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Vietnam be designated as CPCs.

unitedyam

null / Credit: Joe Belanger/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Dec 19, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA).

Here is an overview of some of the religious freedom developments and news in the United States and abroad in 2025:

White House started the Religious Liberty Commission

President Donald Trump established the White House Religious Liberty Commission in May to report on threats to religious freedom in the U.S. and seek to advance legal protections. 

The commission and advisory boards include members of various religions. Catholic members on the commission include Cardinal Timothy Dolan and Bishop Robert Barron. Catholic advisory board members include Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone, Bishop Thomas Paprocki, Bishop Kevin Rhoades, and Father Thomas Ferguson.

Lawmakers condemned persecution of Christians

Rep. Riley Moore, R-West Virginia, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, introduced a joint resolution condemning the persecution of Christians in Muslim-majority countries across the world.

The measure called on the Trump administration to leverage trade, security negotiations, and other diplomatic tools to advocate for religious freedom. 

Court blocked law that would require priests to violate the seal of confession

Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson signed a state law in May that would require priests to report child abuse to authorities even if they hear about it during the sacrament of confession. Catholic bishops brought a lawsuit against the measure. A federal judge blocked the controversial law.

Trump announced federal guidelines to protect prayer at public schools

President Donald Trump announced the U.S. Department of Education will issue federal guidelines to protect prayer at public schools during a Sept. 8 Religious Liberty Commission hearing. He said the guidelines will “protect the right to prayer in our public schools and [provide for] its total protection.”

The president said he sought the guidelines after hearing about instances of public school students and staff being censored and facing disciplinary action for engaging in prayer, reading the Bible, and publicly expressing their faith.

Report found most states fail to safeguard religious liberty 

About three-fourths of states scored less than 50% on Napa Legal Institute’s religious freedom index, which measures how well states safeguard religious liberty for faith-based organizations. The October report was part of Napa’s Faith & Freedom Index that showed Alabama scored the highest and Michigan scored the lowest.

Lawmakers urged federal court to allow Ten Commandments display

First Liberty Institute and Heather Gebelin Hacker of Hacker Stephens LLP filed an amicus brief in December on behalf of 46 United States lawmakers urging the federal court to allow the Ten Commandments to be displayed in public schools.

Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana; Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas; and Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, R-Texas, were among the lawmakers who supported the cause after federal judges blocked Texas and Louisiana laws requiring the display of the commandments.

Supreme Court ruled on religious freedom cases 

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a group of Maryland parents who sued a school district over its refusal to allow families to opt their children out of reading LGBT-themed books. 

In a 6-3 decision on July 27 in Mahmoud v. Taylor, the court ruled the Catholic, Orthodox, and Muslim parents “are likely to succeed on their claim that the board’s policies unconstitutionally burden their religious exercise.” 

In July, the Supreme Court ordered the New York Court of Appeals to revisit Diocese of Albany v. Harris, which challenged a 2017 New York state mandate requiring employers to cover abortions in health insurance plans.

In October, a Native American group working to stop the destruction of a centuries-old religious ritual site in Arizona lost its appeal to the Supreme Court.

Religious liberty abroad: Religious freedom diminished in Afghanistan

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) said in a report that “religious freedom conditions in Afghanistan continue to decline dramatically under Taliban rule.”

The USCIRF wrote in an Aug. 15 report examining the Taliban’s Law on the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice one year after its enactment: The morality law “impacts all Afghans” but “disproportionately affects religious minorities and women, eradicating their participation in public life and systematically eliminating their right to [freedom of religious belief].”

Chinese government banned Catholic priests from evangelizing online

In September, the State Administration for Religious Affairs in China banned several forms of online evangelization for religious clergy of all religions, including Catholic priests.

The Code of Conduct for Religious Clergy was made up of 18 articles including one that said faith leaders are banned from performing religious rituals through live broadcasts, short videos, or online meetings. 

U.S. commission said China should be designated as a country of particular concern

The USCIRF reported China tries to exert total control over religion and said the U.S. Department of State should redesignate China as a “country of particular concern” (CPC) regarding religious freedom.

USCIRF said in September that China uses surveillance, fines, retribution against family members, imprisonment, enforced disappearance, torture, and other forms of abuse to control the Catholic Church and other religious communities in the nation.

In its annual report, USCIRF also recommended Afghanistan, Burma, Cuba, Eritrea, India, Iran, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Vietnam be designated as CPCs.

Read More
Catholic leaders back pregnancy centers, doctors in federal suit over abortion referrals #Catholic Illinois state capitol in Springfield. / Credit: Paul Brady Photography/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Dec 17, 2025 / 12:34 pm (CNA). Catholic leaders in Illinois are backing a coalition of pro-life pregnancy centers and doctors suing the state government over a law that requires them to refer women to abortion providers even if they object to the procedure on religious grounds. The lawsuit, National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Treto, challenges a 2016 Illinois rule that requires health care providers who refuse to perform abortions to nevertheless tout the “benefits” of the procedure and refer women to abortion clinics. In April the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois partly blocked the law, ruling that it violates freedom of speech in forcing providers to relay the alleged benefits of abortion. The court, however, held that the abortion referral requirement is legal. The case is currently at appeal from both sides in the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. On Dec. 16, the Catholic Conference of Illinois and the Illinois Catholic Health Association joined several Orthodox advocates in an amicus brief urging the court to offer the “highest level of protection” to the religious speech of the pro-life plaintiffs. “Providing the highest level of First Amendment protection to religious institutions gives them the predictability they need to pursue their religious missions,” the filing said, arguing that forcing health care providers to refer abortions “could lead people to believe that such conduct is morally acceptable.”First Amendment jurisprudence, the filing argues, leaves “no doubt that the abortion-referral requirement burdens core religious speech without proper justification.”Chicago archbishop Cardinal Blase Cupich said in a press statement that “every life deserves protection and care, no matter how fragile or dependent.” “The Church in Illinois is standing up for that eternal truth against Illinois’ effort to deny it,” the prelate said. Springfield Bishop Thomas Paprocki similarly argued that Catholics “must be free to live according to the 2,000-year-old teachings of our faith without government intrusion.” “Illinois’ mandate threatens that freedom by forcing Catholic ministries and health care professionals to promote a practice we believe is gravely wrong,” he said. “We pray the court will put a swift stop to it.”The amicus brief was filed by the religious liberty law group Becket. Lawyers for the pro-life plaintiffs have argued that the abortion referral requirement violates the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, which was brought by the same organization at the head of the Illinois dispute. The Supreme Court held in that decision that a similar California rule appeared to violate the First Amendment by “requiring [pro-life providers] to inform women how they can obtain state-subsidized abortions.”
Read More

Catholic leaders back pregnancy centers, doctors in federal suit over abortion referrals #Catholic Illinois state capitol in Springfield. / Credit: Paul Brady Photography/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Dec 17, 2025 / 12:34 pm (CNA). Catholic leaders in Illinois are backing a coalition of pro-life pregnancy centers and doctors suing the state government over a law that requires them to refer women to abortion providers even if they object to the procedure on religious grounds. The lawsuit, National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Treto, challenges a 2016 Illinois rule that requires health care providers who refuse to perform abortions to nevertheless tout the “benefits” of the procedure and refer women to abortion clinics. In April the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois partly blocked the law, ruling that it violates freedom of speech in forcing providers to relay the alleged benefits of abortion. The court, however, held that the abortion referral requirement is legal. The case is currently at appeal from both sides in the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. On Dec. 16, the Catholic Conference of Illinois and the Illinois Catholic Health Association joined several Orthodox advocates in an amicus brief urging the court to offer the “highest level of protection” to the religious speech of the pro-life plaintiffs. “Providing the highest level of First Amendment protection to religious institutions gives them the predictability they need to pursue their religious missions,” the filing said, arguing that forcing health care providers to refer abortions “could lead people to believe that such conduct is morally acceptable.”First Amendment jurisprudence, the filing argues, leaves “no doubt that the abortion-referral requirement burdens core religious speech without proper justification.”Chicago archbishop Cardinal Blase Cupich said in a press statement that “every life deserves protection and care, no matter how fragile or dependent.” “The Church in Illinois is standing up for that eternal truth against Illinois’ effort to deny it,” the prelate said. Springfield Bishop Thomas Paprocki similarly argued that Catholics “must be free to live according to the 2,000-year-old teachings of our faith without government intrusion.” “Illinois’ mandate threatens that freedom by forcing Catholic ministries and health care professionals to promote a practice we believe is gravely wrong,” he said. “We pray the court will put a swift stop to it.”The amicus brief was filed by the religious liberty law group Becket. Lawyers for the pro-life plaintiffs have argued that the abortion referral requirement violates the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, which was brought by the same organization at the head of the Illinois dispute. The Supreme Court held in that decision that a similar California rule appeared to violate the First Amendment by “requiring [pro-life providers] to inform women how they can obtain state-subsidized abortions.”

unitedyam

Illinois state capitol in Springfield. / Credit: Paul Brady Photography/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Dec 17, 2025 / 12:34 pm (CNA).

Catholic leaders in Illinois are backing a coalition of pro-life pregnancy centers and doctors suing the state government over a law that requires them to refer women to abortion providers even if they object to the procedure on religious grounds. 

The lawsuit, National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Treto, challenges a 2016 Illinois rule that requires health care providers who refuse to perform abortions to nevertheless tout the “benefits” of the procedure and refer women to abortion clinics. 

In April the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois partly blocked the law, ruling that it violates freedom of speech in forcing providers to relay the alleged benefits of abortion. The court, however, held that the abortion referral requirement is legal. 

The case is currently at appeal from both sides in the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. On Dec. 16, the Catholic Conference of Illinois and the Illinois Catholic Health Association joined several Orthodox advocates in an amicus brief urging the court to offer the “highest level of protection” to the religious speech of the pro-life plaintiffs. 

“Providing the highest level of First Amendment protection to religious institutions gives them the predictability they need to pursue their religious missions,” the filing said, arguing that forcing health care providers to refer abortions “could lead people to believe that such conduct is morally acceptable.”

First Amendment jurisprudence, the filing argues, leaves “no doubt that the abortion-referral requirement burdens core religious speech without proper justification.”

Chicago archbishop Cardinal Blase Cupich said in a press statement that “every life deserves protection and care, no matter how fragile or dependent.” 

“The Church in Illinois is standing up for that eternal truth against Illinois’ effort to deny it,” the prelate said. 

Springfield Bishop Thomas Paprocki similarly argued that Catholics “must be free to live according to the 2,000-year-old teachings of our faith without government intrusion.” 

“Illinois’ mandate threatens that freedom by forcing Catholic ministries and health care professionals to promote a practice we believe is gravely wrong,” he said. “We pray the court will put a swift stop to it.”

The amicus brief was filed by the religious liberty law group Becket. 

Lawyers for the pro-life plaintiffs have argued that the abortion referral requirement violates the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, which was brought by the same organization at the head of the Illinois dispute. 

The Supreme Court held in that decision that a similar California rule appeared to violate the First Amendment by “requiring [pro-life providers] to inform women how they can obtain state-subsidized abortions.”

Read More