religion

Preparing for death with the Sister Servants of Mary #Catholic 
 
 The Sister Servants of Mary hold a procession with the statue of Our Lady of the Assumption at Mary Health of the Sick Convalescent Hospital in Newbury Park, California. / Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick

CNA Staff, Nov 2, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA).
When a 93-year-old Catholic father from New Orleans had a stroke, he knew he was prepared to die.Clinton Jacob attended adoration and Mass daily and was “rarely without a prayer book or rosary in hand,” according to his daughter, Kim DeSopo.“[He] never spoke of death with fear or sadness,” she told CNA. “He would simply say, ‘I’ll be going home.’”But not everyone feels prepared for death.The Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick, is a Catholic community of sisters who dedicate their lives to caring for the sick and dying in New Orleans and around the world. As nurses, they are at the bedside of the dying through the long nights, whether their patients are lifelong Catholics or have never thought about religion.The sisters often encounter patients as well as family members who are struggling to accept “an illness or imminent death,” Sister Catherine Bussen, a Servant of Mary, told CNA.“Many times, there is a need for reconciliation within the family, for a return to their faith, for acceptance of their condition, etc.,” Bussen said.As medical professionals, the sisters provide physical treatment, but they also walk with their patients throughout their illnesses, encouraging patients and families “always with the hope of eternal life,” Bussen said. DeSopo, Jacob’s daughter, called the sisters for support. The next day, Bussen arrived at their doorstep, and every night for two weeks, she sat at Jacob’s bedside. Bussen’s presence was “a gift,” DeSopo said. “Sister Catherine brought peace and calm into a time filled with stress and sorrow.”“Her prayers, patience, and care provided comfort not only to my father but also to my mother, who could finally sleep knowing someone trustworthy and compassionate was by his side,” DeSopo said, recalling Bussen’s “selfless dedication” and “unwavering faith.” Bussen was with Jacob when he died on Sept. 26, 2024. She prepared his body, cleaning him and sprinkling him with holy water, and then prayed with his wife and daughter.“I will never forget the care and dignity she gave him, even after his final breath,” DeSopo said.Sister Catherine (left) and Sister Dorian Salvador (right) pray for the soul of Kim DeSopa’s father on Oct. 1, 2024, at St. Clement of Rome Church in Metairie, Louisiana. Credit: Photo courtesy of Kim DeSopa and Sister CatherineMary at the foot of the cross “I was sick and you visited me.”This Scripture verse, Matthew 25:36, summarizes the charism of the Servants of Mary, according to Bussen. When they care for the sick, they care for Christ.The sisters will care for anyone in need, preferably within the sick person’s own home. In those who are suffering, the sisters “discover Jesus carrying his cross,” Bussen explained. “By caring for the sick, we believe that we are caring for Christ himself, who still suffers today in the suffering mystical body of Christ,” she said.Sister Angélica Ramos cares for Mrs. Hura, a resident of Mary Health of the Sick Convalescent Hospital in Newbury Park, California. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the SickFounded in Madrid, Spain, in the 1800s, the sisters care for the sick and dying in Louisiana, Kansas, and California as well as throughout Central and South America, Spain, France, England, Italy, Cameroon, the Philippines, and Indonesia. They run a hospital for the poor in Bamenda, Cameroon, as well as two missionary houses in Oaxaca, Mexico.The sisters look to Mary as an example as they accompany those who are suffering.“Although we are not able to take away someone’s cross, we are present to them, offering all to the Father, like Mary did at the cross of Jesus, that all suffering may be redemptive and fruitful,” Bussen said.“Every one of us sisters would tell you that it is an absolute privilege to be able to enter into the intimacy of a family’s home, listening to the dying, praying with them, and encouraging them on the final stage of their journey as their soul passes into eternity,” she said.Sister Servants of Mary Fatima Muñoz and Carmela Sanz (front) celebrate a May crowning in Kansas City, Kansas. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick“Our Catholic Christian faith is a beautiful comfort during these times because it is all about looking forward to the promised life to come, the whole goal of our lives, eternal life,” Bussen said.One woman from New Orleans received news no one wants to hear — she had a terminal illness. Though she was not religious, she knew she needed help and did not know who else to turn to, so she called the Servants of Mary.As they cared for her and helped her deal with her terminal diagnosis, the sisters learned the woman was “completely alone in the world,” said Bussen, who took care of her. Other people from the surrounding Catholic community volunteered to stay with her.During that time, the woman found a home in the Catholic Church and received the sacrament of baptism.Her “anxiety was transformed into peace,” said Bussen, who was with her as she died.“As the end drew near, she had a new faith family,” Bussen said. “She was no longer alone.”Remembering the dead The life of a sister Servant of Mary is “contemplative in action.” The sisters unite “our prayer life with our work — going about what we are doing, in all the business of daily life, in a prayerful spirit,” Bussen said.The sisters have time set aside for prayer and work, “but these two aspects cannot be separated from one another,” she continued. “The grace and light received in prayer flows into our work and ministry, and everything we experience in our ministry is taken to prayer.”The Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick care for the sick and the dying. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the SickThroughout the year, the sisters take special care to remember the dead. In November especially, Bussen said the sisters “remember all our patients who have died with us by placing their names in our chapel and offering Masses for their eternal happiness.”“Even after a patient has passed,” she said, “and they no longer need physical care, our ministry continues by praying for their soul.”

Preparing for death with the Sister Servants of Mary #Catholic The Sister Servants of Mary hold a procession with the statue of Our Lady of the Assumption at Mary Health of the Sick Convalescent Hospital in Newbury Park, California. / Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick CNA Staff, Nov 2, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA). When a 93-year-old Catholic father from New Orleans had a stroke, he knew he was prepared to die.Clinton Jacob attended adoration and Mass daily and was “rarely without a prayer book or rosary in hand,” according to his daughter, Kim DeSopo.“[He] never spoke of death with fear or sadness,” she told CNA. “He would simply say, ‘I’ll be going home.’”But not everyone feels prepared for death.The Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick, is a Catholic community of sisters who dedicate their lives to caring for the sick and dying in New Orleans and around the world. As nurses, they are at the bedside of the dying through the long nights, whether their patients are lifelong Catholics or have never thought about religion.The sisters often encounter patients as well as family members who are struggling to accept “an illness or imminent death,” Sister Catherine Bussen, a Servant of Mary, told CNA.“Many times, there is a need for reconciliation within the family, for a return to their faith, for acceptance of their condition, etc.,” Bussen said.As medical professionals, the sisters provide physical treatment, but they also walk with their patients throughout their illnesses, encouraging patients and families “always with the hope of eternal life,” Bussen said. DeSopo, Jacob’s daughter, called the sisters for support. The next day, Bussen arrived at their doorstep, and every night for two weeks, she sat at Jacob’s bedside. Bussen’s presence was “a gift,” DeSopo said. “Sister Catherine brought peace and calm into a time filled with stress and sorrow.”“Her prayers, patience, and care provided comfort not only to my father but also to my mother, who could finally sleep knowing someone trustworthy and compassionate was by his side,” DeSopo said, recalling Bussen’s “selfless dedication” and “unwavering faith.” Bussen was with Jacob when he died on Sept. 26, 2024. She prepared his body, cleaning him and sprinkling him with holy water, and then prayed with his wife and daughter.“I will never forget the care and dignity she gave him, even after his final breath,” DeSopo said.Sister Catherine (left) and Sister Dorian Salvador (right) pray for the soul of Kim DeSopa’s father on Oct. 1, 2024, at St. Clement of Rome Church in Metairie, Louisiana. Credit: Photo courtesy of Kim DeSopa and Sister CatherineMary at the foot of the cross “I was sick and you visited me.”This Scripture verse, Matthew 25:36, summarizes the charism of the Servants of Mary, according to Bussen. When they care for the sick, they care for Christ.The sisters will care for anyone in need, preferably within the sick person’s own home. In those who are suffering, the sisters “discover Jesus carrying his cross,” Bussen explained. “By caring for the sick, we believe that we are caring for Christ himself, who still suffers today in the suffering mystical body of Christ,” she said.Sister Angélica Ramos cares for Mrs. Hura, a resident of Mary Health of the Sick Convalescent Hospital in Newbury Park, California. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the SickFounded in Madrid, Spain, in the 1800s, the sisters care for the sick and dying in Louisiana, Kansas, and California as well as throughout Central and South America, Spain, France, England, Italy, Cameroon, the Philippines, and Indonesia. They run a hospital for the poor in Bamenda, Cameroon, as well as two missionary houses in Oaxaca, Mexico.The sisters look to Mary as an example as they accompany those who are suffering.“Although we are not able to take away someone’s cross, we are present to them, offering all to the Father, like Mary did at the cross of Jesus, that all suffering may be redemptive and fruitful,” Bussen said.“Every one of us sisters would tell you that it is an absolute privilege to be able to enter into the intimacy of a family’s home, listening to the dying, praying with them, and encouraging them on the final stage of their journey as their soul passes into eternity,” she said.Sister Servants of Mary Fatima Muñoz and Carmela Sanz (front) celebrate a May crowning in Kansas City, Kansas. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick“Our Catholic Christian faith is a beautiful comfort during these times because it is all about looking forward to the promised life to come, the whole goal of our lives, eternal life,” Bussen said.One woman from New Orleans received news no one wants to hear — she had a terminal illness. Though she was not religious, she knew she needed help and did not know who else to turn to, so she called the Servants of Mary.As they cared for her and helped her deal with her terminal diagnosis, the sisters learned the woman was “completely alone in the world,” said Bussen, who took care of her. Other people from the surrounding Catholic community volunteered to stay with her.During that time, the woman found a home in the Catholic Church and received the sacrament of baptism.Her “anxiety was transformed into peace,” said Bussen, who was with her as she died.“As the end drew near, she had a new faith family,” Bussen said. “She was no longer alone.”Remembering the dead The life of a sister Servant of Mary is “contemplative in action.” The sisters unite “our prayer life with our work — going about what we are doing, in all the business of daily life, in a prayerful spirit,” Bussen said.The sisters have time set aside for prayer and work, “but these two aspects cannot be separated from one another,” she continued. “The grace and light received in prayer flows into our work and ministry, and everything we experience in our ministry is taken to prayer.”The Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick care for the sick and the dying. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the SickThroughout the year, the sisters take special care to remember the dead. In November especially, Bussen said the sisters “remember all our patients who have died with us by placing their names in our chapel and offering Masses for their eternal happiness.”“Even after a patient has passed,” she said, “and they no longer need physical care, our ministry continues by praying for their soul.”


The Sister Servants of Mary hold a procession with the statue of Our Lady of the Assumption at Mary Health of the Sick Convalescent Hospital in Newbury Park, California. / Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick

CNA Staff, Nov 2, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA).

When a 93-year-old Catholic father from New Orleans had a stroke, he knew he was prepared to die.

Clinton Jacob attended adoration and Mass daily and was “rarely without a prayer book or rosary in hand,” according to his daughter, Kim DeSopo.

“[He] never spoke of death with fear or sadness,” she told CNA. “He would simply say, ‘I’ll be going home.’”

But not everyone feels prepared for death.

The Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick, is a Catholic community of sisters who dedicate their lives to caring for the sick and dying in New Orleans and around the world. As nurses, they are at the bedside of the dying through the long nights, whether their patients are lifelong Catholics or have never thought about religion.

The sisters often encounter patients as well as family members who are struggling to accept “an illness or imminent death,” Sister Catherine Bussen, a Servant of Mary, told CNA.

“Many times, there is a need for reconciliation within the family, for a return to their faith, for acceptance of their condition, etc.,” Bussen said.

As medical professionals, the sisters provide physical treatment, but they also walk with their patients throughout their illnesses, encouraging patients and families “always with the hope of eternal life,” Bussen said. 

DeSopo, Jacob’s daughter, called the sisters for support. The next day, Bussen arrived at their doorstep, and every night for two weeks, she sat at Jacob’s bedside. 

Bussen’s presence was “a gift,” DeSopo said. “Sister Catherine brought peace and calm into a time filled with stress and sorrow.”

“Her prayers, patience, and care provided comfort not only to my father but also to my mother, who could finally sleep knowing someone trustworthy and compassionate was by his side,” DeSopo said, recalling Bussen’s “selfless dedication” and “unwavering faith.” 

Bussen was with Jacob when he died on Sept. 26, 2024. She prepared his body, cleaning him and sprinkling him with holy water, and then prayed with his wife and daughter.

“I will never forget the care and dignity she gave him, even after his final breath,” DeSopo said.

Sister Catherine (left) and Sister Dorian Salvador (right) pray for the soul of Kim DeSopa’s father on Oct. 1, 2024, at St. Clement of Rome Church in Metairie, Louisiana. Credit: Photo courtesy of Kim DeSopa and Sister Catherine
Sister Catherine (left) and Sister Dorian Salvador (right) pray for the soul of Kim DeSopa’s father on Oct. 1, 2024, at St. Clement of Rome Church in Metairie, Louisiana. Credit: Photo courtesy of Kim DeSopa and Sister Catherine

Mary at the foot of the cross 

“I was sick and you visited me.”

This Scripture verse, Matthew 25:36, summarizes the charism of the Servants of Mary, according to Bussen. 

When they care for the sick, they care for Christ.

The sisters will care for anyone in need, preferably within the sick person’s own home. In those who are suffering, the sisters “discover Jesus carrying his cross,” Bussen explained. 

“By caring for the sick, we believe that we are caring for Christ himself, who still suffers today in the suffering mystical body of Christ,” she said.

Sister Angélica Ramos cares for Mrs. Hura, a resident of Mary Health of the Sick Convalescent Hospital in Newbury Park, California. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick
Sister Angélica Ramos cares for Mrs. Hura, a resident of Mary Health of the Sick Convalescent Hospital in Newbury Park, California. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick

Founded in Madrid, Spain, in the 1800s, the sisters care for the sick and dying in Louisiana, Kansas, and California as well as throughout Central and South America, Spain, France, England, Italy, Cameroon, the Philippines, and Indonesia. They run a hospital for the poor in Bamenda, Cameroon, as well as two missionary houses in Oaxaca, Mexico.

The sisters look to Mary as an example as they accompany those who are suffering.

“Although we are not able to take away someone’s cross, we are present to them, offering all to the Father, like Mary did at the cross of Jesus, that all suffering may be redemptive and fruitful,” Bussen said.

“Every one of us sisters would tell you that it is an absolute privilege to be able to enter into the intimacy of a family’s home, listening to the dying, praying with them, and encouraging them on the final stage of their journey as their soul passes into eternity,” she said.

Sister Servants of Mary Fatima Muñoz and Carmela Sanz (front) celebrate a May crowning in Kansas City, Kansas. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick
Sister Servants of Mary Fatima Muñoz and Carmela Sanz (front) celebrate a May crowning in Kansas City, Kansas. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick

“Our Catholic Christian faith is a beautiful comfort during these times because it is all about looking forward to the promised life to come, the whole goal of our lives, eternal life,” Bussen said.

One woman from New Orleans received news no one wants to hear — she had a terminal illness. Though she was not religious, she knew she needed help and did not know who else to turn to, so she called the Servants of Mary.

As they cared for her and helped her deal with her terminal diagnosis, the sisters learned the woman was “completely alone in the world,” said Bussen, who took care of her. Other people from the surrounding Catholic community volunteered to stay with her.

During that time, the woman found a home in the Catholic Church and received the sacrament of baptism.

Her “anxiety was transformed into peace,” said Bussen, who was with her as she died.

“As the end drew near, she had a new faith family,” Bussen said. “She was no longer alone.”

Remembering the dead 

The life of a sister Servant of Mary is “contemplative in action.” 

The sisters unite “our prayer life with our work — going about what we are doing, in all the business of daily life, in a prayerful spirit,” Bussen said.

The sisters have time set aside for prayer and work, “but these two aspects cannot be separated from one another,” she continued. “The grace and light received in prayer flows into our work and ministry, and everything we experience in our ministry is taken to prayer.”

The Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick care for the sick and the dying. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick
The Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick care for the sick and the dying. Credit: Photo courtesy of the Servants of Mary, Ministers to the Sick

Throughout the year, the sisters take special care to remember the dead. 

In November especially, Bussen said the sisters “remember all our patients who have died with us by placing their names in our chapel and offering Masses for their eternal happiness.”

“Even after a patient has passed,” she said, “and they no longer need physical care, our ministry continues by praying for their soul.”

Read More
State-level religious freedom protections grow in recent years #Catholic 
 
 Thirty states have adopted some version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) first signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. / Credit: Leigh Prather/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 21, 2025 / 17:56 pm (CNA).
Protections for religious freedom in the U.S. have grown in recent years with multiple states adopting laws to strengthen the constitutional right to freely exercise one’s religion.As of 2025, 30 states have adopted a version of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) or similar legislative protection for religious freedom. The most recent states to adopt those protections for state-level laws were Georgia and Wyoming in 2025 and Iowa, Utah, and Nebraska in 2024. West Virginia and North Dakota adopted them in 2023 and South Dakota and Montana did the same in 2021.RFRA was first adopted in 1993, when then-President Bill Clinton signed it into law to expand religious freedom protections. Under the law, the federal government cannot “substantially burden” the free exercise of religion unless there is a “compelling government interest” and it is carried out in the “least restrictive” means possible.Congress passed the law in response to the 1990 Supreme Court decision in Employment Division v. Smith, which asserted that the First Amendment was not violated as long as a law was “neutral and generally applicable.” The law was intended to provide a stronger safeguard for the free exercise of religion than what was provided by the highest court. Bipartisan consensus gone, but opposition weakeningWhen RFRA was adopted at the federal level in the 1990s, the protections had overwhelming bipartisan support. In the 2010s, that bipartisan consensus waned as most Democrats voiced opposition to the protections.Tim Schultz, the president of the 1st Amendment Partnership, told CNA that in 2013, two states adopted RFRA with nearly unanimous support from Republicans and about two-thirds support from Democrats. However, the law became more divisive after the 2014 Supreme Court ruling in favor of exempting Hobby Lobby from a mandate to provide abortifacient drugs based on RFRA.“That [bipartisan support] seems like a million years ago,” Schultz said. “Now I would say Republican support is about the same as it was then. Democratic support is under 5%.”Although Schultz did not express optimism that bipartisan support could return any time soon, he credited some cultural shifts for the strong success in Republican-leaning states over the past four years.From 2014 through 2020, he said business groups and LGBT groups “were working together very strongly … in opposition to religious freedom bills” because they saw them as threats to certain anti-discrimination laws related to workplace policies from religious employers.However, post-2020, he said, “the politics of RFRA are far more favorable,” and he noted there has been “far less opposition from business groups.”One reason for this change, according to Schultz, was the widely-published story of NCAA championship swimmer Lia Thomas, a biologically male swimmer who identified as a transgender woman and competed in women’s sports. This led polling to “change on every issue related to LGBT,” he noted.Another reason, he argued, was the response to transgender-related policies by Target and the Bud Light ads, which led to “consumer anger at both of them.” He noted the money lost by the corporations “made business groups say ‘we are not going to have the same posture.’”In spite of the partisanship that fuels the current debate, Schultz noted RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on a wide range of issues, some of which have pleased conservatives and others that have pleased progressives.Although RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on issues related to contraception, abortion, gender, and sexuality, it has also been used to defend religious organizations that provide services for migrants. “[RFRA is] not politically predictable,” Schultz said.

State-level religious freedom protections grow in recent years #Catholic Thirty states have adopted some version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) first signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. / Credit: Leigh Prather/Shutterstock Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 21, 2025 / 17:56 pm (CNA). Protections for religious freedom in the U.S. have grown in recent years with multiple states adopting laws to strengthen the constitutional right to freely exercise one’s religion.As of 2025, 30 states have adopted a version of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) or similar legislative protection for religious freedom. The most recent states to adopt those protections for state-level laws were Georgia and Wyoming in 2025 and Iowa, Utah, and Nebraska in 2024. West Virginia and North Dakota adopted them in 2023 and South Dakota and Montana did the same in 2021.RFRA was first adopted in 1993, when then-President Bill Clinton signed it into law to expand religious freedom protections. Under the law, the federal government cannot “substantially burden” the free exercise of religion unless there is a “compelling government interest” and it is carried out in the “least restrictive” means possible.Congress passed the law in response to the 1990 Supreme Court decision in Employment Division v. Smith, which asserted that the First Amendment was not violated as long as a law was “neutral and generally applicable.” The law was intended to provide a stronger safeguard for the free exercise of religion than what was provided by the highest court. Bipartisan consensus gone, but opposition weakeningWhen RFRA was adopted at the federal level in the 1990s, the protections had overwhelming bipartisan support. In the 2010s, that bipartisan consensus waned as most Democrats voiced opposition to the protections.Tim Schultz, the president of the 1st Amendment Partnership, told CNA that in 2013, two states adopted RFRA with nearly unanimous support from Republicans and about two-thirds support from Democrats. However, the law became more divisive after the 2014 Supreme Court ruling in favor of exempting Hobby Lobby from a mandate to provide abortifacient drugs based on RFRA.“That [bipartisan support] seems like a million years ago,” Schultz said. “Now I would say Republican support is about the same as it was then. Democratic support is under 5%.”Although Schultz did not express optimism that bipartisan support could return any time soon, he credited some cultural shifts for the strong success in Republican-leaning states over the past four years.From 2014 through 2020, he said business groups and LGBT groups “were working together very strongly … in opposition to religious freedom bills” because they saw them as threats to certain anti-discrimination laws related to workplace policies from religious employers.However, post-2020, he said, “the politics of RFRA are far more favorable,” and he noted there has been “far less opposition from business groups.”One reason for this change, according to Schultz, was the widely-published story of NCAA championship swimmer Lia Thomas, a biologically male swimmer who identified as a transgender woman and competed in women’s sports. This led polling to “change on every issue related to LGBT,” he noted.Another reason, he argued, was the response to transgender-related policies by Target and the Bud Light ads, which led to “consumer anger at both of them.” He noted the money lost by the corporations “made business groups say ‘we are not going to have the same posture.’”In spite of the partisanship that fuels the current debate, Schultz noted RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on a wide range of issues, some of which have pleased conservatives and others that have pleased progressives.Although RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on issues related to contraception, abortion, gender, and sexuality, it has also been used to defend religious organizations that provide services for migrants. “[RFRA is] not politically predictable,” Schultz said.


Thirty states have adopted some version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) first signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. / Credit: Leigh Prather/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 21, 2025 / 17:56 pm (CNA).

Protections for religious freedom in the U.S. have grown in recent years with multiple states adopting laws to strengthen the constitutional right to freely exercise one’s religion.

As of 2025, 30 states have adopted a version of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) or similar legislative protection for religious freedom. 

The most recent states to adopt those protections for state-level laws were Georgia and Wyoming in 2025 and Iowa, Utah, and Nebraska in 2024. West Virginia and North Dakota adopted them in 2023 and South Dakota and Montana did the same in 2021.

RFRA was first adopted in 1993, when then-President Bill Clinton signed it into law to expand religious freedom protections. Under the law, the federal government cannot “substantially burden” the free exercise of religion unless there is a “compelling government interest” and it is carried out in the “least restrictive” means possible.

Congress passed the law in response to the 1990 Supreme Court decision in Employment Division v. Smith, which asserted that the First Amendment was not violated as long as a law was “neutral and generally applicable.” The law was intended to provide a stronger safeguard for the free exercise of religion than what was provided by the highest court. 

Bipartisan consensus gone, but opposition weakening

When RFRA was adopted at the federal level in the 1990s, the protections had overwhelming bipartisan support. In the 2010s, that bipartisan consensus waned as most Democrats voiced opposition to the protections.

Tim Schultz, the president of the 1st Amendment Partnership, told CNA that in 2013, two states adopted RFRA with nearly unanimous support from Republicans and about two-thirds support from Democrats. However, the law became more divisive after the 2014 Supreme Court ruling in favor of exempting Hobby Lobby from a mandate to provide abortifacient drugs based on RFRA.

“That [bipartisan support] seems like a million years ago,” Schultz said. “Now I would say Republican support is about the same as it was then. Democratic support is under 5%.”

Although Schultz did not express optimism that bipartisan support could return any time soon, he credited some cultural shifts for the strong success in Republican-leaning states over the past four years.

From 2014 through 2020, he said business groups and LGBT groups “were working together very strongly … in opposition to religious freedom bills” because they saw them as threats to certain anti-discrimination laws related to workplace policies from religious employers.

However, post-2020, he said, “the politics of RFRA are far more favorable,” and he noted there has been “far less opposition from business groups.”

One reason for this change, according to Schultz, was the widely-published story of NCAA championship swimmer Lia Thomas, a biologically male swimmer who identified as a transgender woman and competed in women’s sports. This led polling to “change on every issue related to LGBT,” he noted.

Another reason, he argued, was the response to transgender-related policies by Target and the Bud Light ads, which led to “consumer anger at both of them.” He noted the money lost by the corporations “made business groups say ‘we are not going to have the same posture.’”

In spite of the partisanship that fuels the current debate, Schultz noted RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on a wide range of issues, some of which have pleased conservatives and others that have pleased progressives.

Although RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on issues related to contraception, abortion, gender, and sexuality, it has also been used to defend religious organizations that provide services for migrants. 

“[RFRA is] not politically predictable,” Schultz said.

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The mayor said the city will appeal.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read More
Washington state drops effort to make priests violate seal of confession in reporting law #Catholic 
 
 null / Credit: Brian A Jackson/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Oct 10, 2025 / 14:37 pm (CNA).
Officials in Washington state have agreed to back off a controversial effort to force priests there to violate the seal of confession as part of a mandatory abuse reporting law. A motion filed in federal district court on Oct. 10 affirmed that state and local governments would stop attempting to require priests to report child abuse learned during the sacrament of reconciliation.The state attorney general’s office on Oct. 10 said in a press release that clergy would remain mandatory reporters under state law, but prosecutors would agree “not to enforce reporting requirements for information clergy learn solely through confession or its equivalent in other faiths.”The agreement brings an end to a high-profile and controversial effort by Washington government leaders to violate one of the Catholic Church’s most sacred and inviolable directives, one that requires priests to maintain absolute secrecy over what they learn during confession or else face excommunication. Washington’s revised mandatory reporting law, passed by the state Legislature earlier this year and signed by Gov. Robert Ferguson, added clergy to the list of mandatory abuse reporters in the state. But it didn’t include an exemption for information learned in the confessional, explicitly leaving priests out of a “privileged communication” exception afforded to other professionals.The state’s bishops successfully blocked the law in federal court in July, though the threat of the statute still loomed if the state government was successful at appeal. In the July ruling, District Judge David Estudillo said there was “no question” that the law burdened the free exercise of religion.“In situations where [priests] hear confessions related to child abuse or neglect, [the rule] places them in the position of either complying with the requirements of their faith or violating the law,” the judge wrote.The state’s reversal on Oct. 10 brought cheers from religious liberty advocates, including the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represented state bishops in their suit against the state government. “Washington was wise to walk away from this draconian law and allow Catholic clergy to continue ministering to the faithful,” Becket CEO and President Mark Rienzi said. “This is a victory for religious freedom and for common sense. Priests should never be forced to make the impossible choice of betraying their sacred vows or going to jail.” Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel John Bursch on Friday said the legal advocacy group was “pleased the state agreed to swiftly restore the constitutionally protected freedom of churches and priests.” The legal group had represented Orthodox churches and a priest in their own suit. “Washington was targeting priests by compelling them to break the sacred confidentiality of confession while protecting other confidential communications, like those between attorneys and their clients. That’s rank religious discrimination,” Bursch said. On X, the Washington State Catholic Conference said that Church leaders in the state “consistently supported the law’s broader goal of strengthening protections for minors.” Church leaders “asked only for a narrow exemption to protect the sacrament of confession,” the conference said. “In every other setting other than the confessional, the Church has long supported — and continues to support — mandatory reporting,” the conference added. “We’re grateful Washington ultimately recognized it can prevent abuse without forcing priests to violate their sacred vows.”The legal fight had drawn the backing of a wide variety of supporters and backers, including the Trump administration, Bishop Robert Barron, and a global priests’ group, among numerous others.Well ahead of the law’s passage, Spokane Bishop Thomas Daly had promised Catholics in the state that priests would face prison time rather than violate the seal of confession. “I want to assure you that your shepherds, bishop and priests, are committed to keeping the seal of confession — even to the point of going to jail,” Daly told the faithful in April 2023.The Washington bishops, meanwhile, noted on Oct. 10 that the Catholic Church has upheld the sanctity of confession “for centuries.” “Priests have been imprisoned, tortured, and even killed for upholding the seal of confession,” the state Catholic conference said. “Penitents today need the same assurance that their participation in a holy sacrament will remain free from government interference.”

Washington state drops effort to make priests violate seal of confession in reporting law #Catholic null / Credit: Brian A Jackson/Shutterstock CNA Staff, Oct 10, 2025 / 14:37 pm (CNA). Officials in Washington state have agreed to back off a controversial effort to force priests there to violate the seal of confession as part of a mandatory abuse reporting law. A motion filed in federal district court on Oct. 10 affirmed that state and local governments would stop attempting to require priests to report child abuse learned during the sacrament of reconciliation.The state attorney general’s office on Oct. 10 said in a press release that clergy would remain mandatory reporters under state law, but prosecutors would agree “not to enforce reporting requirements for information clergy learn solely through confession or its equivalent in other faiths.”The agreement brings an end to a high-profile and controversial effort by Washington government leaders to violate one of the Catholic Church’s most sacred and inviolable directives, one that requires priests to maintain absolute secrecy over what they learn during confession or else face excommunication. Washington’s revised mandatory reporting law, passed by the state Legislature earlier this year and signed by Gov. Robert Ferguson, added clergy to the list of mandatory abuse reporters in the state. But it didn’t include an exemption for information learned in the confessional, explicitly leaving priests out of a “privileged communication” exception afforded to other professionals.The state’s bishops successfully blocked the law in federal court in July, though the threat of the statute still loomed if the state government was successful at appeal. In the July ruling, District Judge David Estudillo said there was “no question” that the law burdened the free exercise of religion.“In situations where [priests] hear confessions related to child abuse or neglect, [the rule] places them in the position of either complying with the requirements of their faith or violating the law,” the judge wrote.The state’s reversal on Oct. 10 brought cheers from religious liberty advocates, including the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represented state bishops in their suit against the state government. “Washington was wise to walk away from this draconian law and allow Catholic clergy to continue ministering to the faithful,” Becket CEO and President Mark Rienzi said. “This is a victory for religious freedom and for common sense. Priests should never be forced to make the impossible choice of betraying their sacred vows or going to jail.” Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel John Bursch on Friday said the legal advocacy group was “pleased the state agreed to swiftly restore the constitutionally protected freedom of churches and priests.” The legal group had represented Orthodox churches and a priest in their own suit. “Washington was targeting priests by compelling them to break the sacred confidentiality of confession while protecting other confidential communications, like those between attorneys and their clients. That’s rank religious discrimination,” Bursch said. On X, the Washington State Catholic Conference said that Church leaders in the state “consistently supported the law’s broader goal of strengthening protections for minors.” Church leaders “asked only for a narrow exemption to protect the sacrament of confession,” the conference said. “In every other setting other than the confessional, the Church has long supported — and continues to support — mandatory reporting,” the conference added. “We’re grateful Washington ultimately recognized it can prevent abuse without forcing priests to violate their sacred vows.”The legal fight had drawn the backing of a wide variety of supporters and backers, including the Trump administration, Bishop Robert Barron, and a global priests’ group, among numerous others.Well ahead of the law’s passage, Spokane Bishop Thomas Daly had promised Catholics in the state that priests would face prison time rather than violate the seal of confession. “I want to assure you that your shepherds, bishop and priests, are committed to keeping the seal of confession — even to the point of going to jail,” Daly told the faithful in April 2023.The Washington bishops, meanwhile, noted on Oct. 10 that the Catholic Church has upheld the sanctity of confession “for centuries.” “Priests have been imprisoned, tortured, and even killed for upholding the seal of confession,” the state Catholic conference said. “Penitents today need the same assurance that their participation in a holy sacrament will remain free from government interference.”


null / Credit: Brian A Jackson/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Oct 10, 2025 / 14:37 pm (CNA).

Officials in Washington state have agreed to back off a controversial effort to force priests there to violate the seal of confession as part of a mandatory abuse reporting law.

A motion filed in federal district court on Oct. 10 affirmed that state and local governments would stop attempting to require priests to report child abuse learned during the sacrament of reconciliation.

The state attorney general’s office on Oct. 10 said in a press release that clergy would remain mandatory reporters under state law, but prosecutors would agree “not to enforce reporting requirements for information clergy learn solely through confession or its equivalent in other faiths.”

The agreement brings an end to a high-profile and controversial effort by Washington government leaders to violate one of the Catholic Church’s most sacred and inviolable directives, one that requires priests to maintain absolute secrecy over what they learn during confession or else face excommunication.

Washington’s revised mandatory reporting law, passed by the state Legislature earlier this year and signed by Gov. Robert Ferguson, added clergy to the list of mandatory abuse reporters in the state. But it didn’t include an exemption for information learned in the confessional, explicitly leaving priests out of a “privileged communication” exception afforded to other professionals.

The state’s bishops successfully blocked the law in federal court in July, though the threat of the statute still loomed if the state government was successful at appeal.

In the July ruling, District Judge David Estudillo said there was “no question” that the law burdened the free exercise of religion.

“In situations where [priests] hear confessions related to child abuse or neglect, [the rule] places them in the position of either complying with the requirements of their faith or violating the law,” the judge wrote.

The state’s reversal on Oct. 10 brought cheers from religious liberty advocates, including the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represented state bishops in their suit against the state government.

“Washington was wise to walk away from this draconian law and allow Catholic clergy to continue ministering to the faithful,” Becket CEO and President Mark Rienzi said.

“This is a victory for religious freedom and for common sense. Priests should never be forced to make the impossible choice of betraying their sacred vows or going to jail.”

Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel John Bursch on Friday said the legal advocacy group was “pleased the state agreed to swiftly restore the constitutionally protected freedom of churches and priests.” The legal group had represented Orthodox churches and a priest in their own suit.

“Washington was targeting priests by compelling them to break the sacred confidentiality of confession while protecting other confidential communications, like those between attorneys and their clients. That’s rank religious discrimination,” Bursch said.

On X, the Washington State Catholic Conference said that Church leaders in the state “consistently supported the law’s broader goal of strengthening protections for minors.”

Church leaders “asked only for a narrow exemption to protect the sacrament of confession,” the conference said.

“In every other setting other than the confessional, the Church has long supported — and continues to support — mandatory reporting,” the conference added. “We’re grateful Washington ultimately recognized it can prevent abuse without forcing priests to violate their sacred vows.”

The legal fight had drawn the backing of a wide variety of supporters and backers, including the Trump administration, Bishop Robert Barron, and a global priests’ group, among numerous others.

Well ahead of the law’s passage, Spokane Bishop Thomas Daly had promised Catholics in the state that priests would face prison time rather than violate the seal of confession. “I want to assure you that your shepherds, bishop and priests, are committed to keeping the seal of confession — even to the point of going to jail,” Daly told the faithful in April 2023.

The Washington bishops, meanwhile, noted on Oct. 10 that the Catholic Church has upheld the sanctity of confession “for centuries.”

“Priests have been imprisoned, tortured, and even killed for upholding the seal of confession,” the state Catholic conference said. “Penitents today need the same assurance that their participation in a holy sacrament will remain free from government interference.”

Read More
High Court weighs free speech in Colorado’s law banning counseling on gender identity

null / Credit: Wolfgang Schaller|Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 8, 2025 / 10:00 am (CNA).

The U.S. Supreme Court during oral arguments on Oct. 7 scrutinized Colorado’s law banning counseling on gender identity with some justices voicing concern about possible viewpoint discrimination and free speech restrictions embedded in the statute.

Colorado Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson defended the law, which prohibits licensed psychologists and therapists from engaging in any efforts that it considers “conversion therapy” when treating minors. It does not apply to parents, members of the clergy, or others.

Nearly half of U.S. states have a similar ban. The Supreme Court ruling on this matter could set nationwide precedent on the legality of such laws. 

The Colorado law defines “conversion therapy” as treatments designed to change a person’s “sexual orientation or gender identity,” including changes to “behaviors or gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attraction or feelings toward individuals of the same sex” even if the minor and his or her family has requested that care.

Under the law, permitted therapy includes “acceptance, support, and understanding” of a minor’s self-asserted transgender identity or same-sex attraction.

The law is being challenged by Kaley Chiles, a Christian counselor who provides faith-based counseling to clients with gender dysphoria and same-sex attraction.

Free speech and viewpoint discrimination

Stevenson argued that Colorado’s law is not a speech restriction but instead a regulation on a specific type of “treatment,” saying that regulations cannot cease to apply “just because they are using words.”

“That treatment does not work and carries great risk of harm,” Stevenson said, referring to the practices the state considers to be “conversion therapy.”

She argued that health care has been “heavily regulated since the beginning of our country” and compared “conversion therapy” to doctors providing improper advice on how to treat a condition. She claimed this therapy falsely asserts “you can change this innate thing about yourself.”

“The client and the patient [are] expecting accurate information,” Stevenson said.

Justice Samuel Alito told Stevenson the law sounds like “blatant viewpoint discrimination,” noting that a minor can receive talk therapy welcoming homosexual inclinations but cannot access therapy to reduce those urges. He said it is a restriction “based on the viewpoint expressed.”

Alito said the state’s position is “a minor should not be able to obtain talk therapy to overcome same-sex attraction [even] if that’s what he wants.”

Stevenson argued Colorado is not engaged in viewpoint discrimination and said: “Counseling is an evidence-based practice.” She said it would be wrong to suggest lawmakers “reach[ed] this conclusion based on anything other than protection of minors.”

“There is no other motive going on to suppress viewpoint or expression,” Stevenson said.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Justice Neil Gorsuch asked questions about how to handle issues where medical disagreement exists.

Gorsuch noted, for example, that homosexuality was historically viewed as a mental disorder and asked Stevenson whether it would have been legal for states to ban therapy that affirmed a person’s homosexuality at that time. Stevenson argued that at that time, it would have been legal.

Banning ‘voluntary conversations’

Alliance Defending Freedom Chief Counsel Jim Campbell argued on behalf of Chiles and her counseling services, telling the justices his client offers “voluntary speech between a licensed professional and a minor,” and the law bans “voluntary conversations.”

Campbell noted that if one of her minor clients says, “I would like help realigning my identity with my sex,” then the law requires that Chiles “has to deny them.”

“Kids and families that want this kind of help … are being left without any kind of support,” he added, warning that Chiles, her clients, and potential clients are suffering irreparable harm if access to this treatment continues to be denied.

Campbell argued that “many people have experienced life-changing benefits from this kind of counseling,” many of whom are seeking to “align their life with their religion” and improve their “relationship with God.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor contested whether the issue was about free speech, noting Colorado pointed to studies that such therapy efforts “harm the child … emotionally and physically.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson similarly objected to the claim, questioning whether a counselor acting in her professional capacity “is really expressing … a message for a First Amendment purposes.” She said treatment is different than writing an article about conversion therapy or giving a speech about it.

Campbell disagreed, arguing: “This involves a conversation,” and “a one-on-one conversation is a form of speech.” He said Chiles is “discussing concepts of identity and behaviors and attraction” and simply helping her clients “achieve their goals.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

Teachers and coaches describe experiences

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Suggestions from faith leaders

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read More