Legislation – United Yam

Scottish bishops say ‘prayer moved hearts’ after Scottish Parliament rejects assisted suicide #Catholic In a final vote, members of Scottish Parliament (MSPs) have rejected a bill that would have made assisted suicide legal — a dramatic turn of events that Scotland’s Catholic bishops are attributing to the power of prayer.Reacting to the result immediately after its announcement on March 17, Scotland’s bishops told EWTN News: “Prayer is what moved hearts on this important issue. We are over the moon. Glory be to God that life has triumphed tonight!”Bill sponsor Liam McArthur and his supporters were confident of the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill becoming law. In the first vote in May 2025, Parliament voted 70 to 56 in favor of the bill progressing to Stage 2. The bill was then amended at Stage 2 before moving to Stage 3 for a decisive vote. in the end, however, MSPs rejected it, voting 69 to 57 against the bill. Bishop John Keenan, president of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland, said the vote against the assisted suicide bill would “protect some of Scotland’s most vulnerable individuals from the risk of being pressured into a premature death.” | Credit: Photo courtesy of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland After an emotional debate, 12 MSPs changed sides, moving from supporting the Bill at Stage 1 to opposing it. Notable MSPs who swapped sides included Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party), Daniel Johnson (Labour), and Brian Whittle (Conservative), who publicly announced their decisions during the debate. This followed other notable announcements in the buildup to the vote by Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay and Scottish National Party MSPs Audrey Nicoll and Collette Stevenson, who had initially supported the bill and then shared their decisions to vote against it.Commending MSPs for voting against the legislation, Bishop John Keenan, president of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland, said after the vote: “I would like to express my gratitude to all MSPs for their serious engagement with this issue and for the thoughtful and considered attention they have given to the bill. I am especially grateful to those who upheld the principle of human dignity and advocated on behalf of the vulnerable.”The Catholic Church teaches that assisted suicide is inherently immoral. In advance of the final vote, Keenan commented that a vote against the bill would “protect some of Scotland’s most vulnerable individuals from the risk of being pressured into a premature death.”“Every human life possesses inherent value,” he said. “Genuine compassion is not expressed through ending a life but through accompanying those who suffer and ensuring they receive the medical, emotional, and spiritual support that recognizes their dignity.” Alisdair Hungerford-Morgan, chief executive of pro-life charity Right To Life UK, called the result “a great and deeply significant victory for the most vulnerable people in Scotland.” | Credit: Photo courtesy of Right To Life UK Pro-life groups opposing the bill also highlighted the importance of the vote for the vulnerable. In a message to EWTN News, Alisdair Hungerford-Morgan, chief executive of pro-life charity Right To Life UK, called the result “a great and deeply significant victory for the most vulnerable people in Scotland.”Hungerford-Morgan told EWTN News: “People nearing the end of their lives, no matter what their condition, need love and support, not a pathway to suicide, which is exactly what the Scottish assisted suicide bill would have done."The vote followed an intense and long debate over five sessions, culminating in the final debate and vote on March 17.Hungerford-Morgan said: “If this bill had passed in the Scottish Parliament and gone on to become law, it would have ushered in an irrevocable change that would have put the vulnerable at risk and seen the ending of thousands of lives through assisted suicide in Scotland.”He added: “After two years of debate, and the most intense scrutiny that the question of assisted suicide has ever received in Scotland, Holyrood, which is widely regarded as one of the world’s most socially and politically progressive legislatures, has come to the conclusion that introducing assisted suicide is unsafe and dangerous.”Paul Atkin, pro-life officer at the Archdiocese of St. Andrews and Edinburgh, highlighted “the strength of engagement across our archdiocese” due to the fact that, from the 12 MSPs who changed their votes to opposing the bill, eight represent constituencies within the Archdiocese of St. Andrews and Edinburgh.Atkin told EWTN News: “The defeat of this bill is a welcome result, reflecting the strength of engagement across our archdiocese. From the archbishop’s leadership to parishes who organized hundreds of letters, this was a united effort which made the difference.”Praising the “remarkable contribution” of the archdiocese, Atkin paid tribute to the “polite, persistent engagement from the Catholic community,” which helped “shape outcomes and protect the most vulnerable.”Opponents of the bill called for attention to now move away from assisted suicide toward investment in palliative care. “Our next priority must be to strengthen palliative care by ensuring that it is properly funded and accessible to all who require it,” Keenan said. Echoing this viewpoint, Hungerford-Morgan urged MSPs to “unite to focus on renewed efforts to promote and improve palliative care.”Following the defeat of the bill, Hungerford-Morgan turned his attention to a separate bill currently being debated in the House of Lords in London that would legalize assisted suicide in England and Wales, initiated by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater.Calling on the Leadbeater Bill’s sponsors to “reject assisted suicide,” he said: “This victory will have an impact far beyond Holyrood as the Leadbeater Bill is being debated in the House of Lords. Instead of pushing ahead with this dangerous bill, its sponsors should follow Scotland’s example and reject assisted suicide.”

Cuban government to release 51 prisoners following Vatican talks #Catholic The Cuban government announced that it will release 51 people from prison because of its “smooth” relations with the Vatican — a move that coincides with the upcoming observance of Holy Week.“In the spirit of goodwill, and of the close and smooth relations between the Cuban state and the Vatican — with which communication regarding processes for the review and release of persons deprived of liberty has historically been maintained — the government of Cuba has decided to release, in the coming days, 51 individuals sentenced to deprivation of liberty [prison],” the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs reported in a March 12 statement.The director of the Holy See Press Office, Matteo Bruni, confirmed to ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News, on March 13 that “conversations regarding the release of prisoners have recently taken place.”The statement from the Cuban ministry notes that all these individuals “have served a significant portion of their sentences and have maintained good conduct in prison”; however, it does not indicate whether the group includes political prisoners.The communist regime states that since 2010, it “has granted pardons to 9,905 inmates, while — over the last three years, as part of Cuban practice and pursuant to the provisions of our legislation — another 10,000 individuals sentenced to deprivation of liberty were released based on certain conditions.”This announcement comes amid renewed tensions between Cuba and the United States, which began in January, and the recent meetings that representatives from both countries have held with Vatican officials.On Feb. 20, the U.S. chief of mission in Cuba, Mike Hammer, held a meeting at the Vatican with Archbishop Paul Richard Gallagher, the Holy See’s secretary for relations with states.Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin stated on March 9 that the Holy See has taken “the necessary steps” regarding the situation in Cuba, “always with a view to a solution to the existing problems through dialogue.”In January 2025, the Cuban regime also announced the release of 553 prisoners following mediation by Pope Francis and “in the spirit of the Ordinary Jubilee of 2025.”Victoria Cardiel, EWTN News correspondent in Rome, contributed to this report.This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.

Puerto Rico’s penal code recognizes unborn babies as human beings #Catholic Puerto Rico Gov. Jenniffer González signed into law on Feb. 12 a bill amending the penal code to recognize unborn babies as human beings at “any stage of gestation.”Senate Bill 923 — which when signed became Law 18-2026 — amends Article 92 of the penal code, which currently states that “murder is the intentional, knowing, or reckless killing of a human being.”The new law establishes that “for the purposes of this chapter, ‘human being’ shall include any conceived [unborn child] at any stage of gestation within the mother’s womb.”This legislation was authored by González, a Republican. In a press release posted on X, she explained that the objective is to complement Law 166-2025, known as the Keyshla Madlane Law, named after a pregnant woman in Puerto Rico who was murdered in April 2021.This law, the press release states, “among other things, defines as first-degree murder the intentional and knowing killing of a pregnant woman, resulting in the death of the unborn child at any stage of gestation within the mother’s womb.”In this regard, the approval of Law 18-2026 stands out, noting that “the legislation aims to maintain consistency between civil and criminal provisions by recognizing the conceived unborn child as a human being.”In December 2025, the governor also signed into law Senate Bill 504, which amended the civil code to state that “a human being in gestation or nasciturus is a natural person, including the conceived child at any stage of gestation within the mother’s womb.”A natural person simply means a living human being as distinct from a legal person such as a corporation. At the time, all of these laws were criticized by feminist and pro-abortion groups, who argued that they could lead to a ban on abortion in Puerto Rico and other U.S. jurisdictions.However, Puerto Rico Sen. Joanne Rodríguez Veve defended the passage of Bill 923 in January, stating that “the message of this type of legislation is powerful. It reaffirms this kind of language in our public policy that in the womb of a pregnant woman there is not just anything, not a mere indefinable object, but a subject, a developing human being who has dignity and whose value is intrinsic to their human nature.”This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.

Democratic lawmaker asks ICE director if he’s ‘going to hell’ in fiery hearing #Catholic A Democratic lawmaker asked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons whether he believes he is “going to hell” in a contentious hearing with the House Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday, Feb. 10.Lyons — along with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Joseph Edlow and Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott — testified before the committee as Congress negotiates potential reforms and funding for the agencies.On Feb. 3, Congress voted to extend funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which operates the three agencies, until Feb. 13 to end a four-day partial government shutdown. A deal has not yet been reached to extend funding further.At the hearing, Democratic lawmakers accused ICE of terrorizing the streets, using excessive force, and lacking accountability. Republicans defended ICE and rebuked Democratic officials in certain states for refusing to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.One of the fiercest exchanges came from Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-New Jersey, who praised protesters for “peacefully rejecting your cruel agenda in the streets.” She said ICE believes it is “the highest power who decides which people deserve dignity, protection, and due process” and said “you are wrong [and] we are here for answers.”“How do you think judgment day will work for you, with so much blood on your hands?” McIver asked Lyons, to which he responded that he would not entertain the question.“Do you think you’re going to hell?” she followed up, before being chastised by Committee Chair Andrew Garbarino, R-New York, who told her to avoid personal attacks on witnesses and maintain decorum.McIver said “you guys are always talking about religion here, and the Bible.” She changed the subject slightly and asked Lyons whether he could name agencies that “routinely kill American citizens and still get funding,” which he also said was a question he was “not going to entertain.”“Once again, questions that you cannot answer and that is exactly why … we should not be funding this agency,” McIver said. “The people are watching you; they are watching you. And this is why we need to abolish ICE.”Lawmakers debate ICE operations, future of agencyThe killings of two American citizens at ICE protests — Renée Good and Alex Pretti — were a focal point of the hearing, and two examples that Democrats used to accuse ICE of excessive force and lacking accountability.Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-California, referenced both killings and criticized DHS Secretary Kristi Noem for referring to those who died as “domestic terrorists.” He asked Lyons whether he would apologize to the families or reject that characterization.Lyons said he would not comment on an ongoing investigation but would welcome a private conversation with the families.Democrats are split on whether to reform ICE or abolish it altogether.Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-Rhode Island, brought up instances in which he believes ICE used excessive force and suggested reforms are necessary before Congress awards funding.“It’s not just the actions of the agents in the field,” he said. “It is the lack of accountability from the top that has caused public trust to erode, and there needs to be major reforms before we vote to give any of you any more funding.”Alternatively, Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Illinois, called for abolishing ICE and the entire DHS, which Congress formed to address terrorism threats after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Ramirez said DHS was created to “violate our rights under the pretense of securing our safety.”“I’m going to say it loud and clear and I’m proud to stand by what I say,” she said. “DHS cannot be reformed. It must be dismantled and something new must take its place.”Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, commented during the hearing that Democratic lawmakers “have called to abolish ICE [and] now they’re trying to shut it down” amid the negotiations and discussion during the hearing.He criticized the lack of coordination from Democratic-led “sanctuary” states and cities, which do not cooperate with ICE, saying the policies in Minneapolis “created a perfect storm for our officers being thrown into this situation.”Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, similarly expressed concern about ICE funding moving forward, based on the debates between the two parties.“It seems like one side of the aisle is in favor of open borders and wants to abolish ICE … and the other side of the aisle wants to enforce laws that are on the books,” he said.During the question and answer, Lyons expressed worry about the rhetoric from Democrats and noted that threats and assaults against ICE agents are on the rise. He said agents are trying to “keep America safe, restore order to our communities, [and] return the rule of law to this country.”“Those who illegally enter our country must be held accountable,” he said.Scott also showed concerns about the ongoing debate and expressed hope that DHS could receive support from both Republicans and Democrats.“I believe consistency and seeing support from the leadership on both sides of this building and the president is very important for our security,” he said. “I think the rhetoric and the … politicizing of law enforcement in general detracts from the general morale of our personnel.”Andrew Arthur, a resident fellow in law and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, told “EWTN News Nightly” that he sees “much of [the Democratic threats to halt funding] as political theater,” noting that ICE will continue to operate regardless of whether Congress passes the funding bill.He said Democrats hope to take away an issue that made Trump popular during the 2024 election “and turn it into a bad issue for Republicans” in the midterms.Arthur said there may be some shifts in ICE’s approach in Minneapolis now that Border Czar Tom Homan is involved in seeking the “cooperation of state and city governments” that have been “reluctant, if not hostile” to immigration enforcement over the past year.The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in November 2025 approved a special message with a 216-5 vote that declared opposition to “the indiscriminate mass deportation of people.”Late last month, about 300 Catholic leaders — including 15 bishops — asked Congress to reject ICE funding if the legislation fails to include reforms that have protections for migrants.

unitedyam February 11, 2026

Top U.S. immigration officials defended their policies during a contentious hearing as lawmakers continue to negotiate potential ICE funding and reforms.