Senate

France becomes first European country to ban social media for minors under 15 #Catholic The French Parliament on July 21 definitively passed a law banning children under the age of 15 from accessing social media, making France the first country in Europe to enshrine such a restriction in its national legislation. The measure is the culmination of a campaign led by President Emmanuel Macron since 2017 in which he has denounced anonymity on social media as a gateway to online abuse.The law, presented as a child protection measure against all the risks associated with the use of social media, from addiction to bullying and abuse, has also reignited concerns about increased government oversight of internet users, as the age verification requirements — intended to target minors — entail identity checks for everyone.“France is leading the way in Europe by becoming the first country to establish a ‘digital age of majority’ to better protect our children online,” said Anne Le Hénanff, minister delegate for digital sovereignty, following the vote.The Senate adopted the compromise bill by a vote of 243 to 2, and the National Assembly followed suit a few hours later, paving the way for Macron to sign the measure into law, subject to review by the Constitutional Council.The bill’s central provision bars minors under 15 from accessing “an online social network service.” Leading platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat are expected to fall under the ban, though lawmakers left the precise scope undefined. Wikipedia and other online encyclopedias, along with open-source software and educational platforms, are explicitly exempted. Responsibility for verifying users’ ages falls to the platforms themselves, which must offer at least two different verification methods.Enforcement will unfold in two different stages. New accounts will be subject to age checks starting Sept. 1, while existing accounts belonging to minors under 15 will have until Jan. 1, 2027, before they are suspended.The law also extends France’s existing smartphone ban in middle schools to high schools starting in the 2026 school year.France’s move makes it the first EU member state to enact a blanket social-network age floor, though it follows Australia, which imposed a minimum age of 16 in December 2025. Officials say a coalition of roughly 15 European countries is interested in adopting a similar standard. Le Hénanff confirmed Greece is ready to transpose the French model, with Spain expected to follow in the fall. The European Commission is separately developing its own EU-wide age-verification tool, expected to be available to member states by the end of the year.Under the model France has adopted — built around the “double anonymity” principle found in the EU’s Digital Services Act, the bloc’s main online-platform law — a trusted third party would verify a user’s age from an ID document or bank card and issue an anonymous token confirming only whether the user is over or under 15, without revealing the user’s identity or which platform requested the check. Le Hénanff has described this as a way of avoiding data collection by the platforms themselves. Critics, however, argue the system’s implementation is far less safe than officials suggest.The underlying concern is that this child-protection measure could evolve into a broader mechanism for verifying and tracking the identity of internet users generally. Opponents of the law claim that the mechanics of age verification remain largely undefined barely a month before the law takes effect.They also point to recent history of large-scale personal data breaches across government agencies as a reason for caution about centralizing age- or identity-verification data.La Quadrature du Net, France’s leading digital-rights advocacy group, and the Conseil national du numérique, an official government advisory body, both warned that the law amounted to what they termed “generalized surveillance disguised as child protection.”The European Center for Law and Justice, along the same lines, argues that France and the European Commission are each independently pushing to generalize identity checks across the EU under the banner of online safety policy.Several digital-rights groups are reportedly preparing separate challenges before France’s Council of State and the EU’s Court of Justice, arguing the law violates free-expression and proportionality principles.For now, all eyes are on Australia, the only country with a comparable ban already in force. An early analysis of survey data from roughly 400 young social media users, published in The BMJ on June 24, found little evidence that Australia’s Social Media Minimum Age Act had produced any substantial early drop in social media use among adolescents in its first three months — although researchers cautioned that legislative effects can take time to appear and called for longer-term evaluation.A companion analysis reported that roughly 85% of Australians aged 12 to 15 were still using restricted platforms, the most common workarounds being fake accounts and private browsers.
Read More

France becomes first European country to ban social media for minors under 15 #Catholic The French Parliament on July 21 definitively passed a law banning children under the age of 15 from accessing social media, making France the first country in Europe to enshrine such a restriction in its national legislation. The measure is the culmination of a campaign led by President Emmanuel Macron since 2017 in which he has denounced anonymity on social media as a gateway to online abuse.The law, presented as a child protection measure against all the risks associated with the use of social media, from addiction to bullying and abuse, has also reignited concerns about increased government oversight of internet users, as the age verification requirements — intended to target minors — entail identity checks for everyone.“France is leading the way in Europe by becoming the first country to establish a ‘digital age of majority’ to better protect our children online,” said Anne Le Hénanff, minister delegate for digital sovereignty, following the vote.The Senate adopted the compromise bill by a vote of 243 to 2, and the National Assembly followed suit a few hours later, paving the way for Macron to sign the measure into law, subject to review by the Constitutional Council.The bill’s central provision bars minors under 15 from accessing “an online social network service.” Leading platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat are expected to fall under the ban, though lawmakers left the precise scope undefined. Wikipedia and other online encyclopedias, along with open-source software and educational platforms, are explicitly exempted. Responsibility for verifying users’ ages falls to the platforms themselves, which must offer at least two different verification methods.Enforcement will unfold in two different stages. New accounts will be subject to age checks starting Sept. 1, while existing accounts belonging to minors under 15 will have until Jan. 1, 2027, before they are suspended.The law also extends France’s existing smartphone ban in middle schools to high schools starting in the 2026 school year.France’s move makes it the first EU member state to enact a blanket social-network age floor, though it follows Australia, which imposed a minimum age of 16 in December 2025. Officials say a coalition of roughly 15 European countries is interested in adopting a similar standard. Le Hénanff confirmed Greece is ready to transpose the French model, with Spain expected to follow in the fall. The European Commission is separately developing its own EU-wide age-verification tool, expected to be available to member states by the end of the year.Under the model France has adopted — built around the “double anonymity” principle found in the EU’s Digital Services Act, the bloc’s main online-platform law — a trusted third party would verify a user’s age from an ID document or bank card and issue an anonymous token confirming only whether the user is over or under 15, without revealing the user’s identity or which platform requested the check. Le Hénanff has described this as a way of avoiding data collection by the platforms themselves. Critics, however, argue the system’s implementation is far less safe than officials suggest.The underlying concern is that this child-protection measure could evolve into a broader mechanism for verifying and tracking the identity of internet users generally. Opponents of the law claim that the mechanics of age verification remain largely undefined barely a month before the law takes effect.They also point to recent history of large-scale personal data breaches across government agencies as a reason for caution about centralizing age- or identity-verification data.La Quadrature du Net, France’s leading digital-rights advocacy group, and the Conseil national du numérique, an official government advisory body, both warned that the law amounted to what they termed “generalized surveillance disguised as child protection.”The European Center for Law and Justice, along the same lines, argues that France and the European Commission are each independently pushing to generalize identity checks across the EU under the banner of online safety policy.Several digital-rights groups are reportedly preparing separate challenges before France’s Council of State and the EU’s Court of Justice, arguing the law violates free-expression and proportionality principles.For now, all eyes are on Australia, the only country with a comparable ban already in force. An early analysis of survey data from roughly 400 young social media users, published in The BMJ on June 24, found little evidence that Australia’s Social Media Minimum Age Act had produced any substantial early drop in social media use among adolescents in its first three months — although researchers cautioned that legislative effects can take time to appear and called for longer-term evaluation.A companion analysis reported that roughly 85% of Australians aged 12 to 15 were still using restricted platforms, the most common workarounds being fake accounts and private browsers.

unitedyam

“France is leading the way in Europe by becoming the first country to establish a ‘digital age of majority,’” said the country’s minister delegate for digital sovereignty.

Read More
France legalizes euthanasia after forceful push through Parliament #Catholic The French National Assembly gave final approval on July 15 to a bill legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, making France one of the few European countries to legalize the practice along with Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Spain. The 291-241 vote came three years after President Emmanuel Macron, who had made it one of his key campaign promises, first opened the question to national debate.The vote ended an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate. Members of the National Assembly passed the bill three times over the course of 14 months — most recently on June 30 by a vote of 295 to 232 — and senators rejected it just as many times. On July 7, the Senate passed, by a narrow majority of 169 to 164, with 11 abstentions, a preliminary motion to outright reject the bill rather than debate it, and this motion itself called on the government to end the legislative process. Rather than heeding this call, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu invoked Article 45 of the Constitution, which allows the government to give the National Assembly the final say when repeated readings fail to produce an agreement between the two chambers. He then referred the bill back to the National Assembly for a fourth and final vote instead of a fourth reading in the Senate.The July 15 vote, however, did not close the matter. On July 14, Lecornu announced he would refer part of the text to the Constitutional Council, a step Senate President Gérard Larcher had also urged, citing in particular how the billʼs conscience clause would interact with health and social care facilities built around end-of-life accompaniment that exclude assisted dying. The council must rule within a month, or eight days if the government asks for an expedited review, meaning the law cannot be promulgated until that review is complete even though the Assembly has now adopted it.The end-of-life law covers both euthanasia, administered by a doctor or nurse, and assisted suicide, in which the patient self-administers a lethal substance, under five cumulative conditions: A person must be an adult, a stable resident of France, diagnosed with a serious and incurable condition, in an advanced or terminal phase of that condition, and suffering in a way current treatment cannot relieve, while remaining able to express a free and informed decision. Self-administration is supposed to be the default rule, with the law providing for intervention by a healthcare professional only when the patient is physically unable to act.A supporting measure aimed at expanding access to palliative care was adopted with much broader support, passing its first reading in the Senate by a vote of 307 to 17. To date, more than 20% of French departments still lack a palliative care unit, according to figures cited repeatedly by the Bishops’ Conference of France during the debate.The push to legalize assisted dying traces back to September 2022, when the National Consultative Ethics Committee reversed its earlier opposition to assisted dying and endorsed an “ethical” application of the practice. A citizens’ panel Macron had convened spent the following winter weighing the question and backed legalization.The French president unveiled the outline of a bill in March 2024, but the initiative stalled when he dissolved the Assembly in June the same year. Deputy Olivier Falorni, who had filed an earlier and unsuccessful end-of-life bill, revived it in 2025.Critics argue the newly adopted framework is among the most permissive of its kind in the world. Grégor Puppinck, a Catholic lawyer and director general of the European Centre for Law and Justice, has published a point-by-point analysis contending that the entire process rests on the judgment of a single physician, who may meet the patient for the first time on the day of the request and need not be the one already treating them.The two additional professionals that physician must consult are chosen by the same person, are not required to examine the patient in person, and may be consulted by videoconference. Puppinck noted the statute sets no minimum interval between the decision and the act itself beyond a two-day reflection window, relatives have no guaranteed right to be informed beforehand, and they cannot challenge the outcome in court. Doctors who object in conscience must still refer patients to a colleague willing to proceed, and private and religious institutions, including nursing homes, must accommodate mobile euthanasia teams under threat of administrative penalties. Oversight, in Puppinck’s account, comes only after death, based on a report filed by the same clinician who carried it out.The founders of the ethics collective Democracy, Ethics, and Solidarity, Laurent Frémont and Emmanuel Hirsch, wrote in Le Journal du Dimanche that the law’s eligibility criteria — primarily a “serious and incurable condition” causing “unbearable suffering,” are defined vaguely enough that a strict medical interpretation could make more than 1 million people eligible, including patients with chronic illnesses, psychiatric disorders, or advanced age, without requiring a prior written request, a peer review by medical colleagues, or a psychiatric evaluation.A 2025 study by the Fondation pour l’innovation politique estimated the measure could save the state around 1.4 billion euros (.6 billion) a year in health, eldercare, and pension spending, a projection critics have cited as evidence of the pressures vulnerable and elderly patients could face once the law takes effect.The French bishops’ conference called the text a threat to “the most fragile” among French citizens in a statement issued in May 2025 ahead of the Assembly’s first vote on the bill. The archbishop of Paris, Laurent Ulrich, has repeatedly urged lawmakers to reconsider their position, asserting that true solidarity is built through caring for others rather than through death. “More than assistance in dying, our society needs assistance in living,” he has repeatedly stated.In a video appeal to lawmakers released before the vote, Archbishop Vincent Jordy of Tours invoked François Rabelais’ centuries-old warning that “science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul.” What is underway, he said, is “an anthropological shift,” a new way of viewing life and its end that will gradually reshape the country, touching caregivers, families, people with disabilities, and the relationship between generations. He pointed to the Netherlands, where regulators had layered on safeguards for two decades and where health officials confirmed in June that a child under 12 had been euthanized for the first time, under a 2024 expansion of the law to children between the ages of 1 and 12. Making a law, Jordy said, is also opening doors toward things “one had perhaps not imagined” when it was written.
Read More

France legalizes euthanasia after forceful push through Parliament #Catholic The French National Assembly gave final approval on July 15 to a bill legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, making France one of the few European countries to legalize the practice along with Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Spain. The 291-241 vote came three years after President Emmanuel Macron, who had made it one of his key campaign promises, first opened the question to national debate.The vote ended an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate. Members of the National Assembly passed the bill three times over the course of 14 months — most recently on June 30 by a vote of 295 to 232 — and senators rejected it just as many times. On July 7, the Senate passed, by a narrow majority of 169 to 164, with 11 abstentions, a preliminary motion to outright reject the bill rather than debate it, and this motion itself called on the government to end the legislative process. Rather than heeding this call, Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu invoked Article 45 of the Constitution, which allows the government to give the National Assembly the final say when repeated readings fail to produce an agreement between the two chambers. He then referred the bill back to the National Assembly for a fourth and final vote instead of a fourth reading in the Senate.The July 15 vote, however, did not close the matter. On July 14, Lecornu announced he would refer part of the text to the Constitutional Council, a step Senate President Gérard Larcher had also urged, citing in particular how the billʼs conscience clause would interact with health and social care facilities built around end-of-life accompaniment that exclude assisted dying. The council must rule within a month, or eight days if the government asks for an expedited review, meaning the law cannot be promulgated until that review is complete even though the Assembly has now adopted it.The end-of-life law covers both euthanasia, administered by a doctor or nurse, and assisted suicide, in which the patient self-administers a lethal substance, under five cumulative conditions: A person must be an adult, a stable resident of France, diagnosed with a serious and incurable condition, in an advanced or terminal phase of that condition, and suffering in a way current treatment cannot relieve, while remaining able to express a free and informed decision. Self-administration is supposed to be the default rule, with the law providing for intervention by a healthcare professional only when the patient is physically unable to act.A supporting measure aimed at expanding access to palliative care was adopted with much broader support, passing its first reading in the Senate by a vote of 307 to 17. To date, more than 20% of French departments still lack a palliative care unit, according to figures cited repeatedly by the Bishops’ Conference of France during the debate.The push to legalize assisted dying traces back to September 2022, when the National Consultative Ethics Committee reversed its earlier opposition to assisted dying and endorsed an “ethical” application of the practice. A citizens’ panel Macron had convened spent the following winter weighing the question and backed legalization.The French president unveiled the outline of a bill in March 2024, but the initiative stalled when he dissolved the Assembly in June the same year. Deputy Olivier Falorni, who had filed an earlier and unsuccessful end-of-life bill, revived it in 2025.Critics argue the newly adopted framework is among the most permissive of its kind in the world. Grégor Puppinck, a Catholic lawyer and director general of the European Centre for Law and Justice, has published a point-by-point analysis contending that the entire process rests on the judgment of a single physician, who may meet the patient for the first time on the day of the request and need not be the one already treating them.The two additional professionals that physician must consult are chosen by the same person, are not required to examine the patient in person, and may be consulted by videoconference. Puppinck noted the statute sets no minimum interval between the decision and the act itself beyond a two-day reflection window, relatives have no guaranteed right to be informed beforehand, and they cannot challenge the outcome in court. Doctors who object in conscience must still refer patients to a colleague willing to proceed, and private and religious institutions, including nursing homes, must accommodate mobile euthanasia teams under threat of administrative penalties. Oversight, in Puppinck’s account, comes only after death, based on a report filed by the same clinician who carried it out.The founders of the ethics collective Democracy, Ethics, and Solidarity, Laurent Frémont and Emmanuel Hirsch, wrote in Le Journal du Dimanche that the law’s eligibility criteria — primarily a “serious and incurable condition” causing “unbearable suffering,” are defined vaguely enough that a strict medical interpretation could make more than 1 million people eligible, including patients with chronic illnesses, psychiatric disorders, or advanced age, without requiring a prior written request, a peer review by medical colleagues, or a psychiatric evaluation.A 2025 study by the Fondation pour l’innovation politique estimated the measure could save the state around 1.4 billion euros ($1.6 billion) a year in health, eldercare, and pension spending, a projection critics have cited as evidence of the pressures vulnerable and elderly patients could face once the law takes effect.The French bishops’ conference called the text a threat to “the most fragile” among French citizens in a statement issued in May 2025 ahead of the Assembly’s first vote on the bill. The archbishop of Paris, Laurent Ulrich, has repeatedly urged lawmakers to reconsider their position, asserting that true solidarity is built through caring for others rather than through death. “More than assistance in dying, our society needs assistance in living,” he has repeatedly stated.In a video appeal to lawmakers released before the vote, Archbishop Vincent Jordy of Tours invoked François Rabelais’ centuries-old warning that “science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul.” What is underway, he said, is “an anthropological shift,” a new way of viewing life and its end that will gradually reshape the country, touching caregivers, families, people with disabilities, and the relationship between generations. He pointed to the Netherlands, where regulators had layered on safeguards for two decades and where health officials confirmed in June that a child under 12 had been euthanized for the first time, under a 2024 expansion of the law to children between the ages of 1 and 12. Making a law, Jordy said, is also opening doors toward things “one had perhaps not imagined” when it was written.

unitedyam

The vote, ending an unusual parliamentary stalemate between the National Assembly and the Senate, came three years after President Emmanuel Macron first opened the question to national debate.

Read More
Pro-life leaders remember Sen. Lindsey Graham as longtime champion for unborn children #Catholic WASHINGTON — National pro-life organizations are remembering the late Sen. Lindsey Graham as one of the movement’s most steadfast advocates, praising his decades-long legislative efforts to protect unborn children and pledging to continue the work he championed.Following news of Graham’s death, leaders from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, National Right to Life, and other pro-life groups reflected on the South Carolina Republican’s legacy, highlighting his willingness to pursue federal protections for unborn children even when such efforts faced political opposition.Graham’s sister, Darline Graham Nordone, has been named to hold his Senate seat temporarily to fulfill the remainder of his term.Among those paying tribute was Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which worked closely with Graham on federal abortion legislation.“Lindsey Graham was an unwavering pro-life champion and a friend,” SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement. “A man of vision and tenacity, he gave wise counsel and advocacy in countless difficult moments fighting for the rights of the unborn child.”“Sen. Graham never retreated from the fight for the unborn,” Kelsey Pritchard, communications director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, told Veronica Dudo in an interview with “EWTN News Nightly.” “He always would run into battle, even when no one else would.”Pritchard pointed to Graham’s role in efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, his advocacy on abortion pill regulations, and his repeated calls for national protections for unborn children.Legacy of federal pro-life advocacyFollowing the Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, Graham became one of the leading congressional voices arguing that the federal government still had a responsibility to protect unborn children, introducing legislation to establish nationwide abortion limits.Pritchard said one of the movement’s top priorities remains ending the policy permitting abortion drugs to be prescribed through telehealth and mailed without an in-person physician visit.She noted that Graham was instrumental in organizing a letter signed by 51 senators urging the administration to rescind the policy.“Lindsey Graham was so influential on that front,” Pritchard said. “We’ll be continuing that work in the days ahead.”In a statement issued following Graham’s death, National Right to Life also honored Graham’s decades of advocacy, calling him “one of the most influential and steadfast champions of unborn children ever to serve in the United States Congress.”“The pro-life movement has lost one of its greatest champions,” National Right to Life President Carol Tobias said. “Throughout his career, Lindsey Graham never wavered in his conviction that every innocent human life has inherent dignity and deserves the protection of the law.”Graham’s office noted his role in passing a law enacted in 2004 that recognizes an unborn child as a separate victim in certain federal crimes. It also pointed to his years of introducing legislation to protect pain-capable unborn children from abortion and his advocacy for federal protections following the 2022 Dobbs decision.South Carolina Citizens for Life Executive Director Holly Gatling called Graham “a great defender” of the right to life, saying “the unborn, their mothers, and the medically vulnerable members of our human family had a great defender in Sen. Graham.”Carrying forward Graham’s legacyFor Pritchard, Graham’s lasting legacy extends beyond legislation.“We hope that they remember that he was such a cheerful warrior, someone with a great sense of humor and someone who never backed down,” she told “EWTN News Nightly.” “He said we should never apologize for standing up for the unborn.”“There will be no replacements for Lindsey Graham, that’s for sure,” she added. “But we hope and pray there will be many people who follow his example and continue the fight for babies and moms.”
Read More

Pro-life leaders remember Sen. Lindsey Graham as longtime champion for unborn children #Catholic WASHINGTON — National pro-life organizations are remembering the late Sen. Lindsey Graham as one of the movement’s most steadfast advocates, praising his decades-long legislative efforts to protect unborn children and pledging to continue the work he championed.Following news of Graham’s death, leaders from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, National Right to Life, and other pro-life groups reflected on the South Carolina Republican’s legacy, highlighting his willingness to pursue federal protections for unborn children even when such efforts faced political opposition.Graham’s sister, Darline Graham Nordone, has been named to hold his Senate seat temporarily to fulfill the remainder of his term.Among those paying tribute was Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which worked closely with Graham on federal abortion legislation.“Lindsey Graham was an unwavering pro-life champion and a friend,” SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement. “A man of vision and tenacity, he gave wise counsel and advocacy in countless difficult moments fighting for the rights of the unborn child.”“Sen. Graham never retreated from the fight for the unborn,” Kelsey Pritchard, communications director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, told Veronica Dudo in an interview with “EWTN News Nightly.” “He always would run into battle, even when no one else would.”Pritchard pointed to Graham’s role in efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, his advocacy on abortion pill regulations, and his repeated calls for national protections for unborn children.Legacy of federal pro-life advocacyFollowing the Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, Graham became one of the leading congressional voices arguing that the federal government still had a responsibility to protect unborn children, introducing legislation to establish nationwide abortion limits.Pritchard said one of the movement’s top priorities remains ending the policy permitting abortion drugs to be prescribed through telehealth and mailed without an in-person physician visit.She noted that Graham was instrumental in organizing a letter signed by 51 senators urging the administration to rescind the policy.“Lindsey Graham was so influential on that front,” Pritchard said. “We’ll be continuing that work in the days ahead.”In a statement issued following Graham’s death, National Right to Life also honored Graham’s decades of advocacy, calling him “one of the most influential and steadfast champions of unborn children ever to serve in the United States Congress.”“The pro-life movement has lost one of its greatest champions,” National Right to Life President Carol Tobias said. “Throughout his career, Lindsey Graham never wavered in his conviction that every innocent human life has inherent dignity and deserves the protection of the law.”Graham’s office noted his role in passing a law enacted in 2004 that recognizes an unborn child as a separate victim in certain federal crimes. It also pointed to his years of introducing legislation to protect pain-capable unborn children from abortion and his advocacy for federal protections following the 2022 Dobbs decision.South Carolina Citizens for Life Executive Director Holly Gatling called Graham “a great defender” of the right to life, saying “the unborn, their mothers, and the medically vulnerable members of our human family had a great defender in Sen. Graham.”Carrying forward Graham’s legacyFor Pritchard, Graham’s lasting legacy extends beyond legislation.“We hope that they remember that he was such a cheerful warrior, someone with a great sense of humor and someone who never backed down,” she told “EWTN News Nightly.” “He said we should never apologize for standing up for the unborn.”“There will be no replacements for Lindsey Graham, that’s for sure,” she added. “But we hope and pray there will be many people who follow his example and continue the fight for babies and moms.”

unitedyam

Graham, 71, died on July 11, and pro-life groups pledged to continue legislative efforts he supported.

Read More
Court ruling leaves Haitian migrants’ future uncertain as Archbishop Wenski urges Senate action #Catholic The future of hundreds of thousands of Haitian and Syrian migrants living legally in the United States remains uncertain after the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to move forward with changes to temporary protected status (TPS), shifting the issue back to Congress.In response to the decision, Archbishop Thomas Wenski of Miami called on Congress to protect TPS holders, arguing that ending the humanitarian program would have serious consequences for migrants, their families, and communities across the country.In an interview with Veronica Dudo of “EWTN News Nightly” on June 26, Wenski said the court’s ruling was “not unexpected,” adding that the justices ultimately returned the issue to lawmakers.“The decision was not unexpected, because a conservative court doesn’t want to rule from the bench, as it were. And so what has been done is kick the ball back into the Congress, which is the body of the government that is supposed to be making the laws,” he said.Push for Senate voteThe Miami archbishop said the U.S. Senate should send the president legislation passed in the House that would extend TPS protections for Haitians for three additional years. In April, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the legislation, H.R. 1689, that would extend TPS for Haitians until 2029. Senate consideration is next.“We’re asking the senators of the United States to approve that proposition, so that it could be passed into law,” he said, and he also urged its passage in a column for the Archdiocese of Miami. TPS allows nationals from countries experiencing armed conflict, natural disasters, or other extraordinary conditions to remain and work legally in the United States temporarily. Haiti was first designated for TPS following the devastating 2010 earthquake.Wenski warned that ending those protections could have severe humanitarian consequences.“Haiti could be described very correctly as a house on fire,” he said. “It would be hard to see how you could send back 350,000 people, many of whom have been here since the earthquake of 2010, and have built lives here in this country … and it’s unconscionable to think that that could be done without creating a tremendous humanitarian disaster.”The archbishop also highlighted the economic role many Haitian immigrants play, particularly in healthcare.“The Haitians are working; they’re not on the public dole. They’re not public charges. They’re working, and many of them are working in the healthcare sector,” he said.Within the Archdiocese of Miami, he said, many TPS holders serve in Catholic nursing homes and other healthcare ministries.“To have their work permits revoked and taken away from them would have not only a terrible effect on them, but it would have an economic impact on the entire community,” he said.The archdiocese is also preparing to assist migrants facing legal uncertainty.“The Archdiocese of Miami has Catholic Legal Services … we’re trying to accompany them and to see if there are any other pathways or solutions,” he said.Even so, Wenski emphasized that lasting immigration reform must come from Congress.“The ball is in the court of the Senate.”
Read More

Court ruling leaves Haitian migrants’ future uncertain as Archbishop Wenski urges Senate action #Catholic The future of hundreds of thousands of Haitian and Syrian migrants living legally in the United States remains uncertain after the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to move forward with changes to temporary protected status (TPS), shifting the issue back to Congress.In response to the decision, Archbishop Thomas Wenski of Miami called on Congress to protect TPS holders, arguing that ending the humanitarian program would have serious consequences for migrants, their families, and communities across the country.In an interview with Veronica Dudo of “EWTN News Nightly” on June 26, Wenski said the court’s ruling was “not unexpected,” adding that the justices ultimately returned the issue to lawmakers.“The decision was not unexpected, because a conservative court doesn’t want to rule from the bench, as it were. And so what has been done is kick the ball back into the Congress, which is the body of the government that is supposed to be making the laws,” he said.Push for Senate voteThe Miami archbishop said the U.S. Senate should send the president legislation passed in the House that would extend TPS protections for Haitians for three additional years. In April, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the legislation, H.R. 1689, that would extend TPS for Haitians until 2029. Senate consideration is next.“We’re asking the senators of the United States to approve that proposition, so that it could be passed into law,” he said, and he also urged its passage in a column for the Archdiocese of Miami. TPS allows nationals from countries experiencing armed conflict, natural disasters, or other extraordinary conditions to remain and work legally in the United States temporarily. Haiti was first designated for TPS following the devastating 2010 earthquake.Wenski warned that ending those protections could have severe humanitarian consequences.“Haiti could be described very correctly as a house on fire,” he said. “It would be hard to see how you could send back 350,000 people, many of whom have been here since the earthquake of 2010, and have built lives here in this country … and it’s unconscionable to think that that could be done without creating a tremendous humanitarian disaster.”The archbishop also highlighted the economic role many Haitian immigrants play, particularly in healthcare.“The Haitians are working; they’re not on the public dole. They’re not public charges. They’re working, and many of them are working in the healthcare sector,” he said.Within the Archdiocese of Miami, he said, many TPS holders serve in Catholic nursing homes and other healthcare ministries.“To have their work permits revoked and taken away from them would have not only a terrible effect on them, but it would have an economic impact on the entire community,” he said.The archdiocese is also preparing to assist migrants facing legal uncertainty.“The Archdiocese of Miami has Catholic Legal Services … we’re trying to accompany them and to see if there are any other pathways or solutions,” he said.Even so, Wenski emphasized that lasting immigration reform must come from Congress.“The ball is in the court of the Senate.”

unitedyam

The Miami archbishop said the U.S. Senate should send the president legislation that would extend Temporary Protected Status protections to Haitians for three years.

Read More
Parents sentenced to prison in Brazil after excluding gender content in homeschool curriculum #Catholic A Brazilian couple was sentenced to 50 days in prison related to the homeschooling of their two daughters in an unprecedented case that has raised concerns regarding educational freedom and parental rights in Brazil.Audato and Ieda Denardi were found guilty of the crime of “intellectual neglect” by a court in the state of São Paulo, even though the prosecution itself had requested their acquittal after concluding that the minors were not suffering from any neglect and were demonstrating appropriate academic and social development.The Christian legal organization ADF International, which is representing the family in the appeal, denounced the case as “a grotesque abuse of criminal law” and stated that it would continue defending the couple.The conviction, initially handed down in April 2026 and currently under appeal before the Seventh Criminal Court Chamber of the São Paulo State Court of Justice, will remain suspended while the appeal is being resolved.‘I cannot conceive of a more dictatorial state’Ieda Denardi expressed her distress and defended the right of parents to choose their childrenʼs education.“As a mother, I cannot conceive of a more dictatorial state than the one that wants me in jail because I chose to exercise my right to direct the education and upbringing of my daughters,” she told ADF International.“My husband and I are hopeful the court will recognize our right to choose the best education for our children and overturn this unjust conviction,” she added.The couple began homeschooling their daughters in 2020 after realizing the limitations of the remote public education imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic.Since then, they report a significant improvement in their daughters' academic performance and have been able to incorporate family values ​​and faith into their education.Judge takes into account the girls’ music preferencesOne of the most striking aspects of the case is the reasoning the judge used to reach the verdict. According to the ruling, the educational program provided by the parents did not include content regarding “gender and sex education” or “tolerance and diversity.”Furthermore, the court concluded that the fact that the girls, aged 15 and 11, do not enjoy popular musical genres such as “trap” or “sertanejo” demonstrated an alleged deficiency in their cultural education.The judge cited this despite the fact that both girls are pianists with advanced training and are fluent in several languages.In his ruling, the judge further accused the parents of “using their daughters as pawns in an ideological struggle, subjecting them to a form of unregulated education, the effectiveness and quality of which lack adequate metrics within the Brazilian legal system, while completely excluding the state’s involvement.”The prosecution sought the parents' acquittal“The prosecutor examined the witnesses and recommended acquittal. An independent educational psychologist found no sign of neglect. The girls themselves described rigorous daily education,” explained Julio Pohl, legal counsel for Latin America at ADF International.However, “the judge convicted anyway,” he said, “because a fifteen-year-old said she finds some music lyrics morally questionable, and because the curriculum didn’t include state-approved content on gender.”“A parent has been sentenced to prison not for failing to educate her children, but for educating them according to her own values. This is a grotesque abuse of the criminal law, and we will not let it stand.” Pohl pledged.First criminal prosecution against homeschooling familiesAccording to ADF International, more than 70,000 children are currently being homeschooled in Brazil. However, a lack of regulation has left thousands of families in a state of uncertainty.The Denardi case sets a precedent as the first criminal conviction of parents for homeschooling their children.The situation has even reached the country’s legislature, where hearings were recently held on the matter, and the Denardis asked lawmakers to pass a law guaranteeing families the right to choose this educational model.Although a homeschooling bill was passed by the Chamber of Deputies (lower house) in 2022, the initiative remains stalled in the Senate.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.
Read More

Parents sentenced to prison in Brazil after excluding gender content in homeschool curriculum #Catholic A Brazilian couple was sentenced to 50 days in prison related to the homeschooling of their two daughters in an unprecedented case that has raised concerns regarding educational freedom and parental rights in Brazil.Audato and Ieda Denardi were found guilty of the crime of “intellectual neglect” by a court in the state of São Paulo, even though the prosecution itself had requested their acquittal after concluding that the minors were not suffering from any neglect and were demonstrating appropriate academic and social development.The Christian legal organization ADF International, which is representing the family in the appeal, denounced the case as “a grotesque abuse of criminal law” and stated that it would continue defending the couple.The conviction, initially handed down in April 2026 and currently under appeal before the Seventh Criminal Court Chamber of the São Paulo State Court of Justice, will remain suspended while the appeal is being resolved.‘I cannot conceive of a more dictatorial state’Ieda Denardi expressed her distress and defended the right of parents to choose their childrenʼs education.“As a mother, I cannot conceive of a more dictatorial state than the one that wants me in jail because I chose to exercise my right to direct the education and upbringing of my daughters,” she told ADF International.“My husband and I are hopeful the court will recognize our right to choose the best education for our children and overturn this unjust conviction,” she added.The couple began homeschooling their daughters in 2020 after realizing the limitations of the remote public education imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic.Since then, they report a significant improvement in their daughters' academic performance and have been able to incorporate family values ​​and faith into their education.Judge takes into account the girls’ music preferencesOne of the most striking aspects of the case is the reasoning the judge used to reach the verdict. According to the ruling, the educational program provided by the parents did not include content regarding “gender and sex education” or “tolerance and diversity.”Furthermore, the court concluded that the fact that the girls, aged 15 and 11, do not enjoy popular musical genres such as “trap” or “sertanejo” demonstrated an alleged deficiency in their cultural education.The judge cited this despite the fact that both girls are pianists with advanced training and are fluent in several languages.In his ruling, the judge further accused the parents of “using their daughters as pawns in an ideological struggle, subjecting them to a form of unregulated education, the effectiveness and quality of which lack adequate metrics within the Brazilian legal system, while completely excluding the state’s involvement.”The prosecution sought the parents' acquittal“The prosecutor examined the witnesses and recommended acquittal. An independent educational psychologist found no sign of neglect. The girls themselves described rigorous daily education,” explained Julio Pohl, legal counsel for Latin America at ADF International.However, “the judge convicted anyway,” he said, “because a fifteen-year-old said she finds some music lyrics morally questionable, and because the curriculum didn’t include state-approved content on gender.”“A parent has been sentenced to prison not for failing to educate her children, but for educating them according to her own values. This is a grotesque abuse of the criminal law, and we will not let it stand.” Pohl pledged.First criminal prosecution against homeschooling familiesAccording to ADF International, more than 70,000 children are currently being homeschooled in Brazil. However, a lack of regulation has left thousands of families in a state of uncertainty.The Denardi case sets a precedent as the first criminal conviction of parents for homeschooling their children.The situation has even reached the country’s legislature, where hearings were recently held on the matter, and the Denardis asked lawmakers to pass a law guaranteeing families the right to choose this educational model.Although a homeschooling bill was passed by the Chamber of Deputies (lower house) in 2022, the initiative remains stalled in the Senate.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.

unitedyam

The judge said the fact that the 15- and 11-year-old girls do not enjoy popular music demonstrated an alleged deficiency in their cultural education.

Read More
U.S. House passes housing bill with backing from Catholic Charities USA #Catholic The U.S. House of Representatives on June 23 passed Catholic-backed housing legislation that, if and when it is signed by President Donald Trump, is expected to expand financing for affordable housing. Catholic Charities USA President Kerry Alys Robinson said in a June 23 statement the bill (HR 6644) “has the potential to improve the lives of so many of our fellow citizens.” The White House did not immediately reply to a request for comment, but Trump is expected to sign the bill into law on June 24.The House cleared the measure and agreed to the version that the U.S. Senate had amended on June 22. The legislation, among other things, would adjust federal multifamily loan limits.Rep. French Hill, R-Arkansas, sponsored the bill, titled “The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act.”“We applaud Congressʼs effort to address manufactured housing laws, veterans’ access to housing, and rental assistance for the elderly and disabled through the advancement of this bill,” Robinson said.The Catholic Charities leader praised provisions in the bill related to zoning reforms, increased private investment in the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program, a higher public welfare investment cap for banks, changes to homeless assistance programs, and the reauthorization of the Community Development Block Grant–Disaster Recovery program.She also lauded the bill’s proposed reforms to the HOME Investment Partnerships and Community Development Block Grant programs, which she said have been key resources for addressing the housing needs of low-income individuals and families.“All of God’s children deserve a safe, decent, affordable place to call home and this legislation is an important next step in providing that assurance,” Robinson said. “We look forward to continued collaboration with Congress to ensure that housing policy in our nation reflects both sound research and our shared moral commitment to protect the most vulnerable.”
Read More

U.S. House passes housing bill with backing from Catholic Charities USA #Catholic The U.S. House of Representatives on June 23 passed Catholic-backed housing legislation that, if and when it is signed by President Donald Trump, is expected to expand financing for affordable housing. Catholic Charities USA President Kerry Alys Robinson said in a June 23 statement the bill (HR 6644) “has the potential to improve the lives of so many of our fellow citizens.” The White House did not immediately reply to a request for comment, but Trump is expected to sign the bill into law on June 24.The House cleared the measure and agreed to the version that the U.S. Senate had amended on June 22. The legislation, among other things, would adjust federal multifamily loan limits.Rep. French Hill, R-Arkansas, sponsored the bill, titled “The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act.”“We applaud Congressʼs effort to address manufactured housing laws, veterans’ access to housing, and rental assistance for the elderly and disabled through the advancement of this bill,” Robinson said.The Catholic Charities leader praised provisions in the bill related to zoning reforms, increased private investment in the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program, a higher public welfare investment cap for banks, changes to homeless assistance programs, and the reauthorization of the Community Development Block Grant–Disaster Recovery program.She also lauded the bill’s proposed reforms to the HOME Investment Partnerships and Community Development Block Grant programs, which she said have been key resources for addressing the housing needs of low-income individuals and families.“All of God’s children deserve a safe, decent, affordable place to call home and this legislation is an important next step in providing that assurance,” Robinson said. “We look forward to continued collaboration with Congress to ensure that housing policy in our nation reflects both sound research and our shared moral commitment to protect the most vulnerable.”

unitedyam

Catholic Charities USA President Kerry Alys Robinson said the bill “has the potential to improve the lives of so many of our fellow citizens.”

Read More