pay

Federal judge pauses Louisiana telehealth abortion suit pending FDA review #Catholic After the Trump administration appealed, a federal judge put on pause a lawsuit filed by the state of Louisiana that challenges the federal policy of allowing mail-order abortion pills.U.S. District Judge David Joseph in Lafayette, Louisiana, ruled that the challenge be paused pending the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s review of the safety of the drug but noted that the state could continue the challenge after the review was completed.Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill filed a lawsuit in late 2025 to challenge the 2023 deregulation of mifepristone, which is used in chemical abortions. The 2023 rule changes, initiated during former president Joe Biden’s administration, allowed the drugs to be delivered through the mail and prescribed without any visits to a doctor.In January of this year, President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a motion with a federal district court to pause the suit, pending a review by the FDA of the chemical abortion drug.Louisiana had filed the lawsuit after residents — including Rosalie Markezich, who is named in the lawsuit — said they were coerced into taking abortion pills that were obtained through the mail. In Markezich’s case, she said her boyfriend forced her to take it.Study: Maternal mortality decreased in states that protect unborn lifeA recent study published by JAMA Network Open found a decrease in maternal mortality in states that protect unborn children from abortions as well as in states with permissive abortion laws.The study considered 22 million births and more than 12,000 pregnancy-related deaths from 2018 to 2023, with 14 states with abortion bans and 37 control jurisdictions.“This cohort study found that abortion bans were not associated with statistically significant overall or state-specific increases in pregnancy-associated mortality,” the study read.In states with strong pro-life laws, on average, maternal mortality rates declined slightly faster than pro-abortion states.Illinois pregnancy centers continue to appeal for conscience rightsA court heard arguments on Friday from Illinois pregnancy centers that are appealing an Illinois district court decision that affirmed a law requiring pregnancy centers to refer women for abortions.The National Institute of Family and Life Advocates and three Illinois pregnancy centers appealed after an April 2025 court ruling found that requiring pregnancy centers to refer pregnant women for an abortion was not a violation of speech and conscience rights.“No one should be forced to express a message that violates their convictions, and compelling people to refer others for abortions does that,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Counsel Erin Hawley. “The U.S. Supreme Court held in NIFLA v. Becerra that forcing people to promote abortion is unconstitutional.”Maryland bill to force hospitals to offer abortions goes to governor’s deskA Maryland bill that would force hospitals to offer abortions, even against their conscience, in some circumstances, heads to the stateʼs governor after the state Legislature passed it this week.The bill would require “a hospital to allow the termination of a pregnancy in certain circumstances” under the federal 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which ensures that emergency care is offered regardless of a patient’s ability to pay.The bill would also require a hospital to screen patients for “emergency pregnancy-related medical condition[s]” and to provide “transfer of a patient who has an emergency pregnancy-related medical condition.”“This bill will result in a new government-created loss of valuable highly trained and experienced emergency department physicians, nurses, providers, and staff,” said Dr. James Kelly, representing the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. “The legislation will increase the already existing severe shortages of qualified medical staff and will decrease access to emergency medical care, and endanger the health and safety of patients seeking emergency medical care.”
Read More

Federal judge pauses Louisiana telehealth abortion suit pending FDA review #Catholic After the Trump administration appealed, a federal judge put on pause a lawsuit filed by the state of Louisiana that challenges the federal policy of allowing mail-order abortion pills.U.S. District Judge David Joseph in Lafayette, Louisiana, ruled that the challenge be paused pending the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s review of the safety of the drug but noted that the state could continue the challenge after the review was completed.Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill filed a lawsuit in late 2025 to challenge the 2023 deregulation of mifepristone, which is used in chemical abortions. The 2023 rule changes, initiated during former president Joe Biden’s administration, allowed the drugs to be delivered through the mail and prescribed without any visits to a doctor.In January of this year, President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a motion with a federal district court to pause the suit, pending a review by the FDA of the chemical abortion drug.Louisiana had filed the lawsuit after residents — including Rosalie Markezich, who is named in the lawsuit — said they were coerced into taking abortion pills that were obtained through the mail. In Markezich’s case, she said her boyfriend forced her to take it.Study: Maternal mortality decreased in states that protect unborn lifeA recent study published by JAMA Network Open found a decrease in maternal mortality in states that protect unborn children from abortions as well as in states with permissive abortion laws.The study considered 22 million births and more than 12,000 pregnancy-related deaths from 2018 to 2023, with 14 states with abortion bans and 37 control jurisdictions.“This cohort study found that abortion bans were not associated with statistically significant overall or state-specific increases in pregnancy-associated mortality,” the study read.In states with strong pro-life laws, on average, maternal mortality rates declined slightly faster than pro-abortion states.Illinois pregnancy centers continue to appeal for conscience rightsA court heard arguments on Friday from Illinois pregnancy centers that are appealing an Illinois district court decision that affirmed a law requiring pregnancy centers to refer women for abortions.The National Institute of Family and Life Advocates and three Illinois pregnancy centers appealed after an April 2025 court ruling found that requiring pregnancy centers to refer pregnant women for an abortion was not a violation of speech and conscience rights.“No one should be forced to express a message that violates their convictions, and compelling people to refer others for abortions does that,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Counsel Erin Hawley. “The U.S. Supreme Court held in NIFLA v. Becerra that forcing people to promote abortion is unconstitutional.”Maryland bill to force hospitals to offer abortions goes to governor’s deskA Maryland bill that would force hospitals to offer abortions, even against their conscience, in some circumstances, heads to the stateʼs governor after the state Legislature passed it this week.The bill would require “a hospital to allow the termination of a pregnancy in certain circumstances” under the federal 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which ensures that emergency care is offered regardless of a patient’s ability to pay.The bill would also require a hospital to screen patients for “emergency pregnancy-related medical condition[s]” and to provide “transfer of a patient who has an emergency pregnancy-related medical condition.”“This bill will result in a new government-created loss of valuable highly trained and experienced emergency department physicians, nurses, providers, and staff,” said Dr. James Kelly, representing the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. “The legislation will increase the already existing severe shortages of qualified medical staff and will decrease access to emergency medical care, and endanger the health and safety of patients seeking emergency medical care.”

unitedyam

A roundup of recent pro-life and abortion-related news.

Read More
10,000 Austrian students petition to end mandatory fees funding abortions #Catholic More than 10,000 Austrian university students have signed a petition demanding that the Austrian National Union of Students (ÖH, by its German acronym) abolish its so-called “Repro Fund,” a program that uses mandatory student fees to finance abortions.The petition, organized by ProLife Europe in partnership with CitizenGo, was formally submitted on March 11 to the authorities responsible for administering the fund. Titled “No Student Funds for Killing Human Beings,” the initiative was launched after the ÖH introduced financial assistance for abortions through the Repro Fund.According to the ÖH’s published budget for the 2025-2026 academic year, 18,000 euros have been allocated to cover abortion costs, with plans outlined in the student union’s coalition agreement to expand the fund in the coming years.Petition organizers argue that the policy forces students to subsidize abortions regardless of their moral convictions.“The targeted financing of abortions is incompatible with the freedom of conscience of many students and represents an ethically absolutely indefensible decision,” the petition states.Mandatory student feesIn Austria, all university students must pay a mandatory contribution to the ÖH as part of their semester enrollment.If a student fails to pay the fee, enrollment cannot be completed. This means the student loses official student status for that semester and is barred from attending courses or taking examinations. Nonpayment also results in the loss of student accident insurance, which is normally included as part of enrollment.Because the ÖH contribution is embedded in the legal structure of university registration, students cannot opt out of supporting the organization or its programs, regardless of whether they agree with its political positions or spending decisions.Pro-life petitioners say this system effectively compels students to fund abortions through their mandatory contributions.Student mobilization exceeds expectationsMaria Czernin, president of ProLife Europe, told EWTN News that the petition’s response exceeded expectations in Austria, where public mobilization on civil issues is often limited.“For a three-month petition in Austria, this is a very strong result,” Czernin said. “People here tend to be more reserved in public campaigns, so reaching more than 10,000 signatures is significant.”Organizers initially hoped to gather around 8,000 signatures, she said, but the campaign surpassed that target before the petition closed.The ÖH, Austria’s national student union, is elected democratically by university students. As a result, the Repro Fund was introduced through decisions taken by the organization’s governing coalition.During campus outreach efforts linked to the petition, ProLife Europe volunteers spoke with students who did not identify as pro-life but nevertheless objected to the use of mandatory student fees to fund abortions.“We encountered students who were not pro-life, but they still felt that their money should not be used for this,” Czernin said. “That says a lot about how controversial this program is.”She added that the program remains relatively unknown across many Austrian universities. Organizers believe that if awareness of the funds were more widespread, opposition would grow further.A message to policymakersCzernin said the petition is also intended as a signal to Eva-Maria Holzleitner, Austrian minister for women, science, and research, whose ministry oversees higher education policy.“I hope this petition reaches Minister Holzleitner as a strong sign from students,” she said. “It shows that many students clearly stand against this cooperation and against using their mandatory contributions in this way.”Beyond the immediate funding issue, Czernin explained that abortion should not be promoted as a solution for students facing academic or financial challenges.“There is no evidence that abortion helps women finish their studies,” she said. “But there is substantial research indicating that abortion can negatively affect women’s mental health.”She added that many women have successfully completed their studies while continuing their pregnancies, explaining that support structures for student mothers would be a more constructive response to the pressures some students face.Austria’s abortion landscapeIn Austria, abortion is permitted during the first three months of pregnancy.The law does not formally declare abortion a legal right. Instead, it states that the procedure is not punishable if it is performed by a physician within the first trimester following a prior medical consultation.There is no mandatory waiting period and no requirement for counseling from an independent advisory service. The consultation requirement is limited to a discussion with a doctor before the procedure.Abortion services are generally not covered by Austria’s public health insurance system and must typically be paid for privately. Because of this, women are not required to be registered residents of Austria or enrolled in Austrian health insurance to obtain an abortion in the country.Abortions are also not subject to mandatory reporting requirements and personal information about women undergoing the procedure is not shared with authorities.
Read More

10,000 Austrian students petition to end mandatory fees funding abortions #Catholic More than 10,000 Austrian university students have signed a petition demanding that the Austrian National Union of Students (ÖH, by its German acronym) abolish its so-called “Repro Fund,” a program that uses mandatory student fees to finance abortions.The petition, organized by ProLife Europe in partnership with CitizenGo, was formally submitted on March 11 to the authorities responsible for administering the fund. Titled “No Student Funds for Killing Human Beings,” the initiative was launched after the ÖH introduced financial assistance for abortions through the Repro Fund.According to the ÖH’s published budget for the 2025-2026 academic year, 18,000 euros have been allocated to cover abortion costs, with plans outlined in the student union’s coalition agreement to expand the fund in the coming years.Petition organizers argue that the policy forces students to subsidize abortions regardless of their moral convictions.“The targeted financing of abortions is incompatible with the freedom of conscience of many students and represents an ethically absolutely indefensible decision,” the petition states.Mandatory student feesIn Austria, all university students must pay a mandatory contribution to the ÖH as part of their semester enrollment.If a student fails to pay the fee, enrollment cannot be completed. This means the student loses official student status for that semester and is barred from attending courses or taking examinations. Nonpayment also results in the loss of student accident insurance, which is normally included as part of enrollment.Because the ÖH contribution is embedded in the legal structure of university registration, students cannot opt out of supporting the organization or its programs, regardless of whether they agree with its political positions or spending decisions.Pro-life petitioners say this system effectively compels students to fund abortions through their mandatory contributions.Student mobilization exceeds expectationsMaria Czernin, president of ProLife Europe, told EWTN News that the petition’s response exceeded expectations in Austria, where public mobilization on civil issues is often limited.“For a three-month petition in Austria, this is a very strong result,” Czernin said. “People here tend to be more reserved in public campaigns, so reaching more than 10,000 signatures is significant.”Organizers initially hoped to gather around 8,000 signatures, she said, but the campaign surpassed that target before the petition closed.The ÖH, Austria’s national student union, is elected democratically by university students. As a result, the Repro Fund was introduced through decisions taken by the organization’s governing coalition.During campus outreach efforts linked to the petition, ProLife Europe volunteers spoke with students who did not identify as pro-life but nevertheless objected to the use of mandatory student fees to fund abortions.“We encountered students who were not pro-life, but they still felt that their money should not be used for this,” Czernin said. “That says a lot about how controversial this program is.”She added that the program remains relatively unknown across many Austrian universities. Organizers believe that if awareness of the funds were more widespread, opposition would grow further.A message to policymakersCzernin said the petition is also intended as a signal to Eva-Maria Holzleitner, Austrian minister for women, science, and research, whose ministry oversees higher education policy.“I hope this petition reaches Minister Holzleitner as a strong sign from students,” she said. “It shows that many students clearly stand against this cooperation and against using their mandatory contributions in this way.”Beyond the immediate funding issue, Czernin explained that abortion should not be promoted as a solution for students facing academic or financial challenges.“There is no evidence that abortion helps women finish their studies,” she said. “But there is substantial research indicating that abortion can negatively affect women’s mental health.”She added that many women have successfully completed their studies while continuing their pregnancies, explaining that support structures for student mothers would be a more constructive response to the pressures some students face.Austria’s abortion landscapeIn Austria, abortion is permitted during the first three months of pregnancy.The law does not formally declare abortion a legal right. Instead, it states that the procedure is not punishable if it is performed by a physician within the first trimester following a prior medical consultation.There is no mandatory waiting period and no requirement for counseling from an independent advisory service. The consultation requirement is limited to a discussion with a doctor before the procedure.Abortion services are generally not covered by Austria’s public health insurance system and must typically be paid for privately. Because of this, women are not required to be registered residents of Austria or enrolled in Austrian health insurance to obtain an abortion in the country.Abortions are also not subject to mandatory reporting requirements and personal information about women undergoing the procedure is not shared with authorities.

unitedyam

Pro-life students are demonstrating against the “Repro Fund,” a program that uses mandatory student fees to finance abortions.

Read More