Supreme Court

Catholic legal group criticizes Trump’s birthright-citizenship order as bishops plan to monitor #Catholic A Catholic legal group criticized President Donald Trump’s executive orders to restrict birthright citizenship, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is reviewing and monitoring them.The executive orders issued Aug. 6 direct the government to stop allowing foreign visitors to enter the United States on short‑term visas for the purpose of giving birth and impose a narrower limit on birthright citizenship after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a broader attempt to end citizenship for children born to people in the country temporarily or unlawfully.One executive order would end automatic birthright citizenship for the children of parents who are not U.S. citizens and engage in a commercial transaction or fraudulent activity to ensure the mother is inside U.S. territory to give birth. It also would end birthright citizenship for a child born of a parent considered an “alien enemy,” including members of terrorist organizations.A second executive order titled “Ending Birth Tourism” authorizes federal departments to implement rules that prevent the entry of pregnant foreign women seeking to give birth in the United States and allow removal if they enter the country. The order refers to noncitizens entering the U.S. for the purpose of giving birth on American soil and efforts from a foreign national to coordinate such entries.Under existing State Department guidance, consular officers can deny a B‑1/B‑2 visitor visa if they believe the applicant’s primary purpose is to give birth in the U.S. to obtain citizenship for the child.Anna Gallagher, executive director of the Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC), criticized the birthright citizenship executive order in a statement to EWTN News.“The Supreme Court has already spoken: birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the Constitution,” Gallagher said.“This latest attempt by the Trump administration to circumvent settled law only creates needless fear and uncertainty for immigrant families,” she added. “Catholic social teaching calls us to uphold the dignity of every person and welcome the stranger — not seek new ways to exclude them.”The USCCB has not taken a clear position on the executive orders yet, but it is monitoring how they are enforced and potential judicial proceedings.“The USCCB supports the application of constitutional principles and the rule of law in a manner consistent with the God-given dignity of every human person,” USCCB spokesperson Chieko Noguchi told EWTN News.“We’re reviewing the executive orders and will continue to monitor for administrative actions taken and possible judicial proceedings concerning their implementation,” she said.In June, the Supreme Court ruled the 14th Amendment of the Constitution protects automatic birthright citizenship with few exceptions. The protection extends to children who are born to people who are in the country unlawfully.Although the majority opinion did not directly address “birth tourism,” it did clearly say birthright citizenship applies to the children of parents who are “unlawfully or temporarily present” in the country.The “birth tourism” concern appeared in the dissents authored by both Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas.Alito, in his dissent, wrote that he believed the majority’s opinion protects birthright citizenship to “the children of ‘birth tourists,’” though saying he does not not agree with the ruling.Thomas wrote in his dissent that people have taken advantage of birthright citizenship through “birth tourism” and said there are companies that “collect large fees from wealthy foreigners to facilitate their trips to give birth in the United States.”However, in the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that words like “temporary” and “lawful” do not appear in the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment: “For a simple reason: they did not matter.”Ashley Feasley, a legal expert for the Immigration Law and Policy Initiative at The Catholic University of America, told EWTN News she believes the executive orders are “an attempt to undermine” the Supreme Court.“Although they will almost certainly face legal challenge, in the interim they will place a profound burden on some of the most vulnerable migrants, pregnant women, and on the officers who work diligently to defend our borders,” she said.“Requiring Department of Homeland Security officials to interrogate women, many of whom have legal visas, about their pregnancies, even turning them away from ports of entry without clearly defined criteria for doing so, risks harming both woman and unborn child and diverts DHS officers' attention from the vital missions of border security and trade facilitation,” Feasley said. Legal challenges have not yet been filed.

Catholic legal group criticizes Trump’s birthright-citizenship order as bishops plan to monitor #Catholic A Catholic legal group criticized President Donald Trump’s executive orders to restrict birthright citizenship, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is reviewing and monitoring them.The executive orders issued Aug. 6 direct the government to stop allowing foreign visitors to enter the United States on short‑term visas for the purpose of giving birth and impose a narrower limit on birthright citizenship after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a broader attempt to end citizenship for children born to people in the country temporarily or unlawfully.One executive order would end automatic birthright citizenship for the children of parents who are not U.S. citizens and engage in a commercial transaction or fraudulent activity to ensure the mother is inside U.S. territory to give birth. It also would end birthright citizenship for a child born of a parent considered an “alien enemy,” including members of terrorist organizations.A second executive order titled “Ending Birth Tourism” authorizes federal departments to implement rules that prevent the entry of pregnant foreign women seeking to give birth in the United States and allow removal if they enter the country. The order refers to noncitizens entering the U.S. for the purpose of giving birth on American soil and efforts from a foreign national to coordinate such entries.Under existing State Department guidance, consular officers can deny a B‑1/B‑2 visitor visa if they believe the applicant’s primary purpose is to give birth in the U.S. to obtain citizenship for the child.Anna Gallagher, executive director of the Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC), criticized the birthright citizenship executive order in a statement to EWTN News.“The Supreme Court has already spoken: birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the Constitution,” Gallagher said.“This latest attempt by the Trump administration to circumvent settled law only creates needless fear and uncertainty for immigrant families,” she added. “Catholic social teaching calls us to uphold the dignity of every person and welcome the stranger — not seek new ways to exclude them.”The USCCB has not taken a clear position on the executive orders yet, but it is monitoring how they are enforced and potential judicial proceedings.“The USCCB supports the application of constitutional principles and the rule of law in a manner consistent with the God-given dignity of every human person,” USCCB spokesperson Chieko Noguchi told EWTN News.“We’re reviewing the executive orders and will continue to monitor for administrative actions taken and possible judicial proceedings concerning their implementation,” she said.In June, the Supreme Court ruled the 14th Amendment of the Constitution protects automatic birthright citizenship with few exceptions. The protection extends to children who are born to people who are in the country unlawfully.Although the majority opinion did not directly address “birth tourism,” it did clearly say birthright citizenship applies to the children of parents who are “unlawfully or temporarily present” in the country.The “birth tourism” concern appeared in the dissents authored by both Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas.Alito, in his dissent, wrote that he believed the majority’s opinion protects birthright citizenship to “the children of ‘birth tourists,’” though saying he does not not agree with the ruling.Thomas wrote in his dissent that people have taken advantage of birthright citizenship through “birth tourism” and said there are companies that “collect large fees from wealthy foreigners to facilitate their trips to give birth in the United States.”However, in the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that words like “temporary” and “lawful” do not appear in the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment: “For a simple reason: they did not matter.”Ashley Feasley, a legal expert for the Immigration Law and Policy Initiative at The Catholic University of America, told EWTN News she believes the executive orders are “an attempt to undermine” the Supreme Court.“Although they will almost certainly face legal challenge, in the interim they will place a profound burden on some of the most vulnerable migrants, pregnant women, and on the officers who work diligently to defend our borders,” she said.“Requiring Department of Homeland Security officials to interrogate women, many of whom have legal visas, about their pregnancies, even turning them away from ports of entry without clearly defined criteria for doing so, risks harming both woman and unborn child and diverts DHS officers' attention from the vital missions of border security and trade facilitation,” Feasley said. Legal challenges have not yet been filed.

The Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC) criticized an executive order targeting birthright citizenship. The U.S. Catholic bishops are reviewing and monitoring the order.

Read More
Federal court hears arguments on Oklahoma’s ban for religious charter schools #Catholic A federal court heard oral arguments on Aug. 5 about whether an Oklahoma law banning religious charter schools violates the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.Oklahoma established a charter school system in 1999, which provides public funds for privately run K–12 schools to which parents can send their children instead of a public school operated by a school district. The law only allows “nonsectarian” applicants, which prevents any participation from schools that have a religious identity.In 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board (SCSB) approved an application from a proposed Catholic charter school — St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School — which led to a legal challenge from Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who opposed religious charter schools.The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided against the school, finding that charter schools are public schools and that public schools must be secular. St. Isidore appealed this to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that resulted in a 4-4 deadlock with no majority opinion because Justice Amy Coney Barrett had a conflict of interest and recused herself.Amid no clear guidance from the federal courts, a Jewish organization — National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation — filed an application to set up a charter school, which was denied. The group, represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund, filed a new lawsuit and asked a federal district court to require the SCSB to consider religious applicants.“Oklahoma makes room in its charter program for schools of all shapes and sizes, from those focused on science and fine arts to language immersion and classical education,” Daniel Chen, a Becket attorney representing the Jewish foundation, said in a statement.“The one it refuses to make room for is a faith-based school,” Chen added. “That is religious discrimination, plain and simple, and the state deserves a failing grade for it.”Chen told EWTN News that Becket is asking the federal court to immediately allow National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation to set up a charter school, citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent that requires government programs to allow religious institutions the same access as secular institutions.“They’re private actors,” he said. “And because they’re private actors, they cannot be excluded from participating in a public benefits program.”Chen said the federal district court is not bound by the precedent of the Oklahoma Supreme Court because that is a state court, so it could rule in favor of the school. He also said if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, he hopes Barrett can weigh in to break the 4-4 deadlock.“We’re hoping that [for] our case, there wouldn’t have to be any recusals,” he said.School board’s hands are tiedAlthough the charter school board denied the application from the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation, one of its lawyers at First Liberty Institute explained to EWTN News that its hands are tied by the statute and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision.“They’re following that order,” said Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty and the lawyer representing SCSB. “But [they] would be happy if the federal court didn’t [require the school board] to engage in that kind of discrimination.”Sasser said the SCSB does not want to exclude an applicant “simply because it’s religious” and would rather evaluate applicants “just based on the merits.” But he said the order “makes them exclude religious schools just because they’re religious.”“They want to maximize all of the various choices and opportunities for parents,” he added.Sasser said he hopes the question goes to the U.S. Supreme Court again so “we’ll get an answer — a real answer.” He said it would provide more clarity for the school board, which “needs an answer.”John Meiser, director of the Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic at the University of Notre Dame and the lawyer who represented St. Isidore at the Supreme Court, told EWTN News that the question ultimately comes down to whether charter schools are private or public institutions.In Oklahoma, he said charter schools “are called public schools” and that label “introduces a confusion that I don’t think would be present if they chose any other word.”He said Supreme Court precedent is clear that religious institutions must have equal access to government programs available to private institutions, but if a charter school is a “government school,” that “doesn’t apply” because the government “doesn’t and can’t run religious schools.”In spite of the label, Meiser said charter schools in Oklahoma are “formed and designed and run by private groups” and people who work there “are private employees.” He said the structure “looks just like a government contract” and funding from the government “doesn’t turn all those private contractors into the government itself.”“The dispute is really just about, ‘Well is a charter school in some way different?’” he said.Although Meiser said he is not aware of any ongoing Catholic efforts to recreate a charter school, he said that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s constitutional arguments for equal access “would presumably apply to all religious operators of schools, and so it would open the door to a Catholic charter school or other religiously based charter school.”Attorney general stands firmDrummond, who remains Oklahoma’s attorney general, is standing firm in opposing the creation of religious charter schools and is fighting against National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s efforts."This matter was resolved when the state Supreme Courtʼs ruling to prevent taxpayer funded religious charter schools was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year,” Leslie Berger, press secretary for the attorney general’s office, told EWTN News.Drummond has also criticized the charter school board in public statements surrounding this legal battle in March, accusing the SCSB of “playing politics with the taxpayers' money” and alleged it “manipulated the record [about why National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s application was rejected] to make that lawsuit easier to lose — not win.”"A state agency that deliberately hobbles its own legal position is not doing its job — it is betraying Oklahoma taxpayers,” he said. “I will not allow that.”Drummond has garnered support from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) for opposing the creation of religious charter schools.Attorneys for FFRF are representing seven Oklahomans who oppose their tax money being used to support religious charter schools.“The federal court should rule according to constitutional principles,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement. “A religious public charter school has no place in our secular public education system.”It’s unclear when the federal court will issue its ruling, but National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation has asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction against the state so it can begin operating a school while the litigation plays out.

Federal court hears arguments on Oklahoma’s ban for religious charter schools #Catholic A federal court heard oral arguments on Aug. 5 about whether an Oklahoma law banning religious charter schools violates the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.Oklahoma established a charter school system in 1999, which provides public funds for privately run K–12 schools to which parents can send their children instead of a public school operated by a school district. The law only allows “nonsectarian” applicants, which prevents any participation from schools that have a religious identity.In 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board (SCSB) approved an application from a proposed Catholic charter school — St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School — which led to a legal challenge from Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who opposed religious charter schools.The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided against the school, finding that charter schools are public schools and that public schools must be secular. St. Isidore appealed this to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that resulted in a 4-4 deadlock with no majority opinion because Justice Amy Coney Barrett had a conflict of interest and recused herself.Amid no clear guidance from the federal courts, a Jewish organization — National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation — filed an application to set up a charter school, which was denied. The group, represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund, filed a new lawsuit and asked a federal district court to require the SCSB to consider religious applicants.“Oklahoma makes room in its charter program for schools of all shapes and sizes, from those focused on science and fine arts to language immersion and classical education,” Daniel Chen, a Becket attorney representing the Jewish foundation, said in a statement.“The one it refuses to make room for is a faith-based school,” Chen added. “That is religious discrimination, plain and simple, and the state deserves a failing grade for it.”Chen told EWTN News that Becket is asking the federal court to immediately allow National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation to set up a charter school, citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent that requires government programs to allow religious institutions the same access as secular institutions.“They’re private actors,” he said. “And because they’re private actors, they cannot be excluded from participating in a public benefits program.”Chen said the federal district court is not bound by the precedent of the Oklahoma Supreme Court because that is a state court, so it could rule in favor of the school. He also said if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, he hopes Barrett can weigh in to break the 4-4 deadlock.“We’re hoping that [for] our case, there wouldn’t have to be any recusals,” he said.School board’s hands are tiedAlthough the charter school board denied the application from the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation, one of its lawyers at First Liberty Institute explained to EWTN News that its hands are tied by the statute and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision.“They’re following that order,” said Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty and the lawyer representing SCSB. “But [they] would be happy if the federal court didn’t [require the school board] to engage in that kind of discrimination.”Sasser said the SCSB does not want to exclude an applicant “simply because it’s religious” and would rather evaluate applicants “just based on the merits.” But he said the order “makes them exclude religious schools just because they’re religious.”“They want to maximize all of the various choices and opportunities for parents,” he added.Sasser said he hopes the question goes to the U.S. Supreme Court again so “we’ll get an answer — a real answer.” He said it would provide more clarity for the school board, which “needs an answer.”John Meiser, director of the Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic at the University of Notre Dame and the lawyer who represented St. Isidore at the Supreme Court, told EWTN News that the question ultimately comes down to whether charter schools are private or public institutions.In Oklahoma, he said charter schools “are called public schools” and that label “introduces a confusion that I don’t think would be present if they chose any other word.”He said Supreme Court precedent is clear that religious institutions must have equal access to government programs available to private institutions, but if a charter school is a “government school,” that “doesn’t apply” because the government “doesn’t and can’t run religious schools.”In spite of the label, Meiser said charter schools in Oklahoma are “formed and designed and run by private groups” and people who work there “are private employees.” He said the structure “looks just like a government contract” and funding from the government “doesn’t turn all those private contractors into the government itself.”“The dispute is really just about, ‘Well is a charter school in some way different?’” he said.Although Meiser said he is not aware of any ongoing Catholic efforts to recreate a charter school, he said that a Supreme Court ruling in favor of the National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s constitutional arguments for equal access “would presumably apply to all religious operators of schools, and so it would open the door to a Catholic charter school or other religiously based charter school.”Attorney general stands firmDrummond, who remains Oklahoma’s attorney general, is standing firm in opposing the creation of religious charter schools and is fighting against National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s efforts."This matter was resolved when the state Supreme Courtʼs ruling to prevent taxpayer funded religious charter schools was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year,” Leslie Berger, press secretary for the attorney general’s office, told EWTN News.Drummond has also criticized the charter school board in public statements surrounding this legal battle in March, accusing the SCSB of “playing politics with the taxpayers' money” and alleged it “manipulated the record [about why National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation’s application was rejected] to make that lawsuit easier to lose — not win.”"A state agency that deliberately hobbles its own legal position is not doing its job — it is betraying Oklahoma taxpayers,” he said. “I will not allow that.”Drummond has garnered support from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) for opposing the creation of religious charter schools.Attorneys for FFRF are representing seven Oklahomans who oppose their tax money being used to support religious charter schools.“The federal court should rule according to constitutional principles,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement. “A religious public charter school has no place in our secular public education system.”It’s unclear when the federal court will issue its ruling, but National Ben Gamla Jewish Charter School Foundation has asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction against the state so it can begin operating a school while the litigation plays out.

Oklahoma’s Statewide Charter School Board wants to approve religious charter schools, but a ruling from the Oklahoma Supreme Court and efforts by the state attorney general prevent it from doing so.

Read More
Family learns hospice bed opened as father faced scheduled assisted suicide #Catholic As New Yorkʼs Medical Aid in Dying Act takes effect amid legal challenges, one Canadian woman is sharing her familyʼs experience with physician-assisted suicide, saying it convinced her that vulnerable patients need greater access to hospice and palliative care — not assisted death.Speaking with “EWTN News Nightly” in an Aug. 5 interview with anchor Veronica Dudo, Colleen De Vos recounted the final months of her father’s life. He died through Canadaʼs medical assistance in dying (MAID) program in 2023 at age 85 after being diagnosed with terminal chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).“My father wasnʼt very forthcoming with his intentions, unfortunately,” De Vos said. “We did see some very fragile moments during the course of his illness.”As his condition worsened, De Vos said her family worked to arrange hospice or in-home palliative care, believing those services would provide the compassionate support he needed.“We were advocating very strongly for hospice care or at-home palliative program,” she said. “He seemed to agree with that.”But the familyʼs efforts were unsuccessful.“He was turned down on two occasions, deeming that his diagnosis wasnʼt enough to warrant hospice care,” De Vos said. “That was a surprise to us because we could see he was deteriorating very quickly.”Instead, she said, a nurse practitioner overseeing his care at home spoke privately with her father about pursuing MAID as his symptoms worsened.De Vos said the contrast between accessing hospice and obtaining assisted suicide was striking.“The irony of the availability of MAID that could be arranged very quickly …  sidelined us very much,” she said.She recalled receiving “literally the cardboard box in the mail” containing the drugs and supplies needed for the procedure.“Obtaining [hospice care] was very difficult,” she said. “And this was very simple.”On the day her father was scheduled to die, De Vos said the family finally learned that a hospice bed had become available.She called it “very heartbreaking” that he declined the hospice bed.“I think he proceeded because of his loss of hope,” she said. “We absolutely were prepared to provide him with round-the-clock care.”Religious freedom challenge in New YorkDe Vos' story comes as Catholic ministries in New York are challenging the stateʼs new assisted suicide law in federal court.Speaking on Aug. 5 with “EWTN News Nightly,” Adele Keim, senior counsel at Becket Fund, said New Yorkʼs law differs significantly from those in states such as Oregon and Washington.“New York has created an opt-out law,” Keim said. “The presumption is youʼre in unless you opt out.”While some providers may decline to prescribe or administer the lethal drugs, Keim argued that Catholic ministries are still required to participate in other aspects of the process.“You canʼt opt out of your obligations to counsel patients about assisted suicide and the ‘benefits’ it would provide,” she said. Nor can Catholic providers refuse to refer patients elsewhere if they object to assisted suicide on religious grounds, she said.Keim said those requirements prompted the Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne and other Catholic ministries to seek relief in federal court.Hope, dignity, and the court’s decisionShe also spoke with hope in a federal judgeʼs decision to temporarily block New York from enforcing the law against the Catholic plaintiffs while the case proceeds.“The right to assisted suicide is not a fundamental right,” Keim said, noting that both the U.S. Supreme Court and New Yorkʼs highest court have ruled there is no constitutional right to assisted suicide. “But… there is a fundamental right to religious freedom.”According to Keim, the injunction ensures the state cannot enforce the law against the Catholic ministries while their constitutional claims are considered.The Catholic Church teaches that assisted suicide and euthanasia are gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person while encouraging compassionate palliative and hospice care that accompanies patients through natural death.De Vos said she hopes lawmakers instead “think about the sacred gift of life that we are given by God,” adding: “I donʼt believe that itʼs up to the lawmakers… to give someone the autonomy to end their life.”

Family learns hospice bed opened as father faced scheduled assisted suicide #Catholic As New Yorkʼs Medical Aid in Dying Act takes effect amid legal challenges, one Canadian woman is sharing her familyʼs experience with physician-assisted suicide, saying it convinced her that vulnerable patients need greater access to hospice and palliative care — not assisted death.Speaking with “EWTN News Nightly” in an Aug. 5 interview with anchor Veronica Dudo, Colleen De Vos recounted the final months of her father’s life. He died through Canadaʼs medical assistance in dying (MAID) program in 2023 at age 85 after being diagnosed with terminal chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).“My father wasnʼt very forthcoming with his intentions, unfortunately,” De Vos said. “We did see some very fragile moments during the course of his illness.”As his condition worsened, De Vos said her family worked to arrange hospice or in-home palliative care, believing those services would provide the compassionate support he needed.“We were advocating very strongly for hospice care or at-home palliative program,” she said. “He seemed to agree with that.”But the familyʼs efforts were unsuccessful.“He was turned down on two occasions, deeming that his diagnosis wasnʼt enough to warrant hospice care,” De Vos said. “That was a surprise to us because we could see he was deteriorating very quickly.”Instead, she said, a nurse practitioner overseeing his care at home spoke privately with her father about pursuing MAID as his symptoms worsened.De Vos said the contrast between accessing hospice and obtaining assisted suicide was striking.“The irony of the availability of MAID that could be arranged very quickly …  sidelined us very much,” she said.She recalled receiving “literally the cardboard box in the mail” containing the drugs and supplies needed for the procedure.“Obtaining [hospice care] was very difficult,” she said. “And this was very simple.”On the day her father was scheduled to die, De Vos said the family finally learned that a hospice bed had become available.She called it “very heartbreaking” that he declined the hospice bed.“I think he proceeded because of his loss of hope,” she said. “We absolutely were prepared to provide him with round-the-clock care.”Religious freedom challenge in New YorkDe Vos' story comes as Catholic ministries in New York are challenging the stateʼs new assisted suicide law in federal court.Speaking on Aug. 5 with “EWTN News Nightly,” Adele Keim, senior counsel at Becket Fund, said New Yorkʼs law differs significantly from those in states such as Oregon and Washington.“New York has created an opt-out law,” Keim said. “The presumption is youʼre in unless you opt out.”While some providers may decline to prescribe or administer the lethal drugs, Keim argued that Catholic ministries are still required to participate in other aspects of the process.“You canʼt opt out of your obligations to counsel patients about assisted suicide and the ‘benefits’ it would provide,” she said. Nor can Catholic providers refuse to refer patients elsewhere if they object to assisted suicide on religious grounds, she said.Keim said those requirements prompted the Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne and other Catholic ministries to seek relief in federal court.Hope, dignity, and the court’s decisionShe also spoke with hope in a federal judgeʼs decision to temporarily block New York from enforcing the law against the Catholic plaintiffs while the case proceeds.“The right to assisted suicide is not a fundamental right,” Keim said, noting that both the U.S. Supreme Court and New Yorkʼs highest court have ruled there is no constitutional right to assisted suicide. “But… there is a fundamental right to religious freedom.”According to Keim, the injunction ensures the state cannot enforce the law against the Catholic ministries while their constitutional claims are considered.The Catholic Church teaches that assisted suicide and euthanasia are gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person while encouraging compassionate palliative and hospice care that accompanies patients through natural death.De Vos said she hopes lawmakers instead “think about the sacred gift of life that we are given by God,” adding: “I donʼt believe that itʼs up to the lawmakers… to give someone the autonomy to end their life.”

A Canadian woman said her father’s assisted suicide came after failed efforts to secure hospice care, as Catholic ministries challenge New York’s assisted suicide law in court.

Read More
U.S. Catholic bishops urge ‘fair representation’ on Voting Rights Act anniversary #Catholic A subcommittee of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) urged policymakers to protect “fair representation” in elections ahead of the 61st anniversary of President Lyndon B. Johnson signing the Voting Rights Act of 1965.“The Voting Rights Act of 1965 emerged from the sacrifices and perseverance of countless individuals who worked to secure the fundamental right to vote, particularly for communities of color that had long faced discrimination and exclusion,” said Bishop Daniel E. Garcia, chair of the USCCB Subcommittee for the Promotion of Racial Justice and Reconciliation.The USCCB issued the statement on Aug. 5, one day before the anniversary. The Voting Rights Act was enacted to combat Jim Crow laws that were designed to disenfranchise Black Americans.“For decades, the U.S. bishops have advocated for the right of eligible citizens to participate fully in public life, including the protection of voting rights,” said Garcia, bishop of Austin, Texas. “We encourage all citizens to exercise their right to vote and urge policymakers to safeguard voting rights and promote fair representation for all.”“Today is also an occasion to remember the hard-won history of voting rights in our country, and to recommit to the work which remains,” he added.Garcia also said in his statement that “today, many communities of color worry about how recent developments will impact their fair representation and future participation in the democratic process.”Recent developments could affect fair district maps, equal representation, and long‑term participation in elections. One development includes a 2013 Supreme Court decision, which ruled unconstitutional a provision of the Voting Rights Act that required certain states to obtain federal approval to change voting laws if that state had a history of disenfranchising voters.Another development included a 2020 ruling that upheld Arizona election laws that required voters to cast ballots in their assigned precincts and banned people from submitting another person’s ballot (unless that person is a family or household member).Rulings in 2023 and 2026 addressed racial gerrymandering, which is illegal under the Voting Rights Act. The 2023 ruling found a 2023 Alabama congressional district map to be illegal for not having any Black-majority districts and the 2026 ruling struck down Louisiana maps for relying too much on race in crafting districts.Although racial gerrymandering is illegal, federal law does not prohibit partisan gerrymandering.Garcia quoted Pope Leo XIV’s encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, saying the bishops “affirm the value of democracy ‘insofar as it guarantees the effective participation of citizens’ as a reflection of their dignity.”“May we continue to work together for the common good and for a society in which all citizens are able to participate fully and faithfully in our democracy,” Garcia said.

U.S. Catholic bishops urge ‘fair representation’ on Voting Rights Act anniversary #Catholic A subcommittee of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) urged policymakers to protect “fair representation” in elections ahead of the 61st anniversary of President Lyndon B. Johnson signing the Voting Rights Act of 1965.“The Voting Rights Act of 1965 emerged from the sacrifices and perseverance of countless individuals who worked to secure the fundamental right to vote, particularly for communities of color that had long faced discrimination and exclusion,” said Bishop Daniel E. Garcia, chair of the USCCB Subcommittee for the Promotion of Racial Justice and Reconciliation.The USCCB issued the statement on Aug. 5, one day before the anniversary. The Voting Rights Act was enacted to combat Jim Crow laws that were designed to disenfranchise Black Americans.“For decades, the U.S. bishops have advocated for the right of eligible citizens to participate fully in public life, including the protection of voting rights,” said Garcia, bishop of Austin, Texas. “We encourage all citizens to exercise their right to vote and urge policymakers to safeguard voting rights and promote fair representation for all.”“Today is also an occasion to remember the hard-won history of voting rights in our country, and to recommit to the work which remains,” he added.Garcia also said in his statement that “today, many communities of color worry about how recent developments will impact their fair representation and future participation in the democratic process.”Recent developments could affect fair district maps, equal representation, and long‑term participation in elections. One development includes a 2013 Supreme Court decision, which ruled unconstitutional a provision of the Voting Rights Act that required certain states to obtain federal approval to change voting laws if that state had a history of disenfranchising voters.Another development included a 2020 ruling that upheld Arizona election laws that required voters to cast ballots in their assigned precincts and banned people from submitting another person’s ballot (unless that person is a family or household member).Rulings in 2023 and 2026 addressed racial gerrymandering, which is illegal under the Voting Rights Act. The 2023 ruling found a 2023 Alabama congressional district map to be illegal for not having any Black-majority districts and the 2026 ruling struck down Louisiana maps for relying too much on race in crafting districts.Although racial gerrymandering is illegal, federal law does not prohibit partisan gerrymandering.Garcia quoted Pope Leo XIV’s encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, saying the bishops “affirm the value of democracy ‘insofar as it guarantees the effective participation of citizens’ as a reflection of their dignity.”“May we continue to work together for the common good and for a society in which all citizens are able to participate fully and faithfully in our democracy,” Garcia said.

Bishop Daniel E. Garcia said the Voting Rights Act was born from the sacrifice of those who fought to secure equal access to the ballot, especially for communities of color long denied that right.

Read More
Michigan ends restriction on Catholic counselors who treat kids with gender dysphoria #Catholic Catholic counselors in Michigan who offer Catholic-based “talk therapy” to children who struggle with gender dysphoria and gender identity will be allowed to continue their services, according to a federal court order issued on July 31.Government officials in Michigan have agreed they will not enforce the state ban on "conversion therapy” on the counselors who work for Catholic Charities of Jackson, Lenawee, and Hillsdale Counties or any other counselors engaged in “talk therapy.”The Catholic Charities affiliate sued Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and other state officials after the governor signed into law a ban on “conversion therapy.” This prohibited treatments that seek to “change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity.” This includes “efforts to change behavior or gender expression.”According to the law, counselors were allowed to offer “acceptance, support, or understanding” of a child who self-identifies with a gender inconsistent with his or her sex. The lawsuit filed by the Catholic Charities affiliate argued the law forced them to “affirm” that the child could identify with a gender that is inconsistent with his or her sex, which conflicts with Catholic teaching.The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that “everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity.” The Vatican’s 2019 document “Male and Female He Created Them” teaches that sexual identity is a reality “given” through one’s biological and physiological nature. Officials in Michigan consented to a court order that acknowledges that the law — as enforced against the Catholic Charities affiliate — violates the counselors’ First Amendment right to freedom of speech.According to the court order, the state cannot enforce this law against the Catholic counselors or any other counselors in the state if the treatment “consists exclusively of talking.” The order is permanent and took effect immediately, upon the signature of Judge Jane M. Beckering.The Catholic Charities affiliate was represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund. Luke Goodrich, senior counsel at Becket and lead attorney for the counselors, said in a statement that the order is “a major victory for children, counselors, and common sense.”“Kids who are hurting deserve compassion, not a one-way ticket to harmful drugs, hormones, and surgery,” he said. “Now counselors can offer compassionate counseling without fearing that state bureaucrats will come knocking.”This agreement comes four months after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that a similar ban on “conversion therapy” in Colorado violated the First Amendment rights of counselors, warning the state-level bans “suppress speech based on viewpoint.”Kimberly Bush, a spokesperson for Michigan’s attorney general’s office, said in a statement to EWTN News that Michigan entered into the agreement because of the Supreme Court ruling, but added: “We remain deeply disappointed in this decision and have grave concerns for the implications this could bring for the safety and welfare of Michigan’s children.”A spokesperson for Whitmer also expressed disappointment in the agreement in a statement to EWTN News."Governor Whitmer believes that every young person deserves the right to grow up safe, supported, and free to be themselves,” the spokesperson said.“This order is disappointing and represents a step back for the LGBTQ+ community,” the spokesperson added. “Michigan will never support any practice that harms or shames LGBTQ+ youth. The governor will continue to fight to ensure that LGBTQ+ individuals are protected from attacks and that their voices are heard.”In June, Oregonʼs Board of Licensed Professional Counselors and Therapists withdrew disciplinary action against Catholic counselors who engaged in similar talk therapy, citing the Supreme Court decision as its reason.

Michigan ends restriction on Catholic counselors who treat kids with gender dysphoria #Catholic Catholic counselors in Michigan who offer Catholic-based “talk therapy” to children who struggle with gender dysphoria and gender identity will be allowed to continue their services, according to a federal court order issued on July 31.Government officials in Michigan have agreed they will not enforce the state ban on "conversion therapy” on the counselors who work for Catholic Charities of Jackson, Lenawee, and Hillsdale Counties or any other counselors engaged in “talk therapy.”The Catholic Charities affiliate sued Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and other state officials after the governor signed into law a ban on “conversion therapy.” This prohibited treatments that seek to “change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity.” This includes “efforts to change behavior or gender expression.”According to the law, counselors were allowed to offer “acceptance, support, or understanding” of a child who self-identifies with a gender inconsistent with his or her sex. The lawsuit filed by the Catholic Charities affiliate argued the law forced them to “affirm” that the child could identify with a gender that is inconsistent with his or her sex, which conflicts with Catholic teaching.The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that “everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity.” The Vatican’s 2019 document “Male and Female He Created Them” teaches that sexual identity is a reality “given” through one’s biological and physiological nature. Officials in Michigan consented to a court order that acknowledges that the law — as enforced against the Catholic Charities affiliate — violates the counselors’ First Amendment right to freedom of speech.According to the court order, the state cannot enforce this law against the Catholic counselors or any other counselors in the state if the treatment “consists exclusively of talking.” The order is permanent and took effect immediately, upon the signature of Judge Jane M. Beckering.The Catholic Charities affiliate was represented by lawyers at the Becket Fund. Luke Goodrich, senior counsel at Becket and lead attorney for the counselors, said in a statement that the order is “a major victory for children, counselors, and common sense.”“Kids who are hurting deserve compassion, not a one-way ticket to harmful drugs, hormones, and surgery,” he said. “Now counselors can offer compassionate counseling without fearing that state bureaucrats will come knocking.”This agreement comes four months after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that a similar ban on “conversion therapy” in Colorado violated the First Amendment rights of counselors, warning the state-level bans “suppress speech based on viewpoint.”Kimberly Bush, a spokesperson for Michigan’s attorney general’s office, said in a statement to EWTN News that Michigan entered into the agreement because of the Supreme Court ruling, but added: “We remain deeply disappointed in this decision and have grave concerns for the implications this could bring for the safety and welfare of Michigan’s children.”A spokesperson for Whitmer also expressed disappointment in the agreement in a statement to EWTN News."Governor Whitmer believes that every young person deserves the right to grow up safe, supported, and free to be themselves,” the spokesperson said.“This order is disappointing and represents a step back for the LGBTQ+ community,” the spokesperson added. “Michigan will never support any practice that harms or shames LGBTQ+ youth. The governor will continue to fight to ensure that LGBTQ+ individuals are protected from attacks and that their voices are heard.”In June, Oregonʼs Board of Licensed Professional Counselors and Therapists withdrew disciplinary action against Catholic counselors who engaged in similar talk therapy, citing the Supreme Court decision as its reason.

A Catholic Charities affiliate sued Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and other state officials after the governor signed into law a ban on “conversion therapy.”

Read More
Archbishop Wenski meets lawmakers to gain support for Haitian migrants amid deportation fears #Catholic Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski traveled to Washington, D.C., on July 28 to advocate on behalf of Haitian migrants who fear they will soon be targets of President Donald Trump’s mass deportation efforts.Wenski’s meetings with lawmakers came one day after the expiration of the automatic work‑permit extension under temporary protected status (TPS) for Haitians. The Supreme Court ruled last month that the administration has the authority to terminate TPS, which ended their work authorization and could subject them to deportation orders. “Haiti is a house on fire,” Wenski told “EWTN News Nightly” Capitol Hill correspondent Erik Rosales before entering the office of Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia.The archbishop said TPS expiration and possible deportation of hundreds of thousands of Haitians is bad for the migrants — who would be sent back to an unstable country — and for the American communities in which the migrants live and work. About 353,000 Haitian nationals hold TPS status in the U.S., according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).“To think that we can send 350,000 people back to Haiti without that having very bad consequences in Haiti — but also here because these people are working, they’re not on the dole, they’re working, and if they’re removed from their jobs, if they lose their work permits, that’s going to have a negative economic impact on the communities in which they live,” Wenski said.As Haitian TPS status ends, some lawmakers have introduced bills to compel the DHS to extend the status. In April, the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation, H.R. 1689, that would extend TPS for Haitians for three more years. No legislative efforts have gained traction in the Senate.The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has advocated strongly on behalf of Haitian migrants, asking the Trump administration and lawmakers to extend TPS. About two-thirds of Haiti is Catholic.Chieko Noguchi, spokeswoman for the USCCB, told EWTN News that Bishop Brendan J. Cahill, USCCB Committee on Migration chair, “has encouraged his brother bishops across the country to engage with their elected officials” on Haitian TPS status and broader immigration reform efforts.“As pastors committed to upholding the common good, the bishops are actively engaging in this dialogue and continue to be grateful for the opportunity to do so, which they acknowledged in their special message last November,” she said.In November 2025, the USCCB adopted a message in a 216-5 vote that opposed the “indiscriminate mass deportation of people” and policies that revoke the legal status of migrants, such as the terminations of TPS for various groups of migrants.Kaine, an advocate for extending TPS, told EWTN News after meeting with Wenski that he was glad “to discuss the critical need for Congress to do what is right and protect TPS holders who have been in the U.S. legally for years” and looks forward to working with the USCCB to advocate for TPS holders.TPS holders “have made countless contributions in important sectors such as healthcare and construction, and developed deep roots in our communities through their U.S. citizen families and businesses,” he added. “Many TPS holders, such as those from Haiti, should not be forced to return to the extremely dangerous conditions that made them seek safety in the United States.”Status of Haitian migrantsOn July 27, DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin reposted a DHS post on X, which said “temporary protected status is exactly that — TEMPORARY” and urged anyone whose TPS has expired to self-deport out of the U.S.“For those with terminated TPS: it’s closing time,” the post read. “You don’t have to go home, but you can’t stay here.”When asked whether DHS intends to specifically target Haitians for deportation amid the TPS expiration, a spokesperson told EWTN News that the department “does not discuss ongoing or future operations” but is conducting law enforcement activities daily.“For too long, TPS has been allowed to function as a de facto amnesty program despite Congress never intending it to be permanent,” the spokesperson said.Andrew Arthur, a former immigration judge and a resident fellow in law and policy for the Center for Immigration Studies, told EWTN News that TPS was initially approved for Haiti in 2010 after a devastating earthquake.Although Haiti continues to face serious safety and political stability concerns, he said the effects of the earthquake no longer impact the country. He noted that Haitians can apply for permanent status under other programs, such as if they are eligible for asylum, but that TPS is not a permanent resettlement program.Arthur said Haitians who are in the U.S. under temporary legal status “had the opportunity to work in the United States and make money” and learn skills, which they can take back “to Haiti and [it can] help them make Haiti a better country.”The former judge said he expects immigration enforcement toward Haitians to be part of “the larger enforcement efforts” rather than a targeted campaign against Haitians, with a priority toward people who have been convicted of crimes.“The response [now] is foreign aid on the part of the United States and aid from the Catholic Church toward making Haiti a better place,” Arthur said.TPS status for Syrian migrants also ended on July 27. El Salvador’s TPS designation is set to expire Sept. 9.

Archbishop Wenski meets lawmakers to gain support for Haitian migrants amid deportation fears #Catholic Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski traveled to Washington, D.C., on July 28 to advocate on behalf of Haitian migrants who fear they will soon be targets of President Donald Trump’s mass deportation efforts.Wenski’s meetings with lawmakers came one day after the expiration of the automatic work‑permit extension under temporary protected status (TPS) for Haitians. The Supreme Court ruled last month that the administration has the authority to terminate TPS, which ended their work authorization and could subject them to deportation orders. “Haiti is a house on fire,” Wenski told “EWTN News Nightly” Capitol Hill correspondent Erik Rosales before entering the office of Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia.The archbishop said TPS expiration and possible deportation of hundreds of thousands of Haitians is bad for the migrants — who would be sent back to an unstable country — and for the American communities in which the migrants live and work. About 353,000 Haitian nationals hold TPS status in the U.S., according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).“To think that we can send 350,000 people back to Haiti without that having very bad consequences in Haiti — but also here because these people are working, they’re not on the dole, they’re working, and if they’re removed from their jobs, if they lose their work permits, that’s going to have a negative economic impact on the communities in which they live,” Wenski said.As Haitian TPS status ends, some lawmakers have introduced bills to compel the DHS to extend the status. In April, the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation, H.R. 1689, that would extend TPS for Haitians for three more years. No legislative efforts have gained traction in the Senate.The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has advocated strongly on behalf of Haitian migrants, asking the Trump administration and lawmakers to extend TPS. About two-thirds of Haiti is Catholic.Chieko Noguchi, spokeswoman for the USCCB, told EWTN News that Bishop Brendan J. Cahill, USCCB Committee on Migration chair, “has encouraged his brother bishops across the country to engage with their elected officials” on Haitian TPS status and broader immigration reform efforts.“As pastors committed to upholding the common good, the bishops are actively engaging in this dialogue and continue to be grateful for the opportunity to do so, which they acknowledged in their special message last November,” she said.In November 2025, the USCCB adopted a message in a 216-5 vote that opposed the “indiscriminate mass deportation of people” and policies that revoke the legal status of migrants, such as the terminations of TPS for various groups of migrants.Kaine, an advocate for extending TPS, told EWTN News after meeting with Wenski that he was glad “to discuss the critical need for Congress to do what is right and protect TPS holders who have been in the U.S. legally for years” and looks forward to working with the USCCB to advocate for TPS holders.TPS holders “have made countless contributions in important sectors such as healthcare and construction, and developed deep roots in our communities through their U.S. citizen families and businesses,” he added. “Many TPS holders, such as those from Haiti, should not be forced to return to the extremely dangerous conditions that made them seek safety in the United States.”Status of Haitian migrantsOn July 27, DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin reposted a DHS post on X, which said “temporary protected status is exactly that — TEMPORARY” and urged anyone whose TPS has expired to self-deport out of the U.S.“For those with terminated TPS: it’s closing time,” the post read. “You don’t have to go home, but you can’t stay here.”When asked whether DHS intends to specifically target Haitians for deportation amid the TPS expiration, a spokesperson told EWTN News that the department “does not discuss ongoing or future operations” but is conducting law enforcement activities daily.“For too long, TPS has been allowed to function as a de facto amnesty program despite Congress never intending it to be permanent,” the spokesperson said.Andrew Arthur, a former immigration judge and a resident fellow in law and policy for the Center for Immigration Studies, told EWTN News that TPS was initially approved for Haiti in 2010 after a devastating earthquake.Although Haiti continues to face serious safety and political stability concerns, he said the effects of the earthquake no longer impact the country. He noted that Haitians can apply for permanent status under other programs, such as if they are eligible for asylum, but that TPS is not a permanent resettlement program.Arthur said Haitians who are in the U.S. under temporary legal status “had the opportunity to work in the United States and make money” and learn skills, which they can take back “to Haiti and [it can] help them make Haiti a better country.”The former judge said he expects immigration enforcement toward Haitians to be part of “the larger enforcement efforts” rather than a targeted campaign against Haitians, with a priority toward people who have been convicted of crimes.“The response [now] is foreign aid on the part of the United States and aid from the Catholic Church toward making Haiti a better place,” Arthur said.TPS status for Syrian migrants also ended on July 27. El Salvador’s TPS designation is set to expire Sept. 9.

The Department of Homeland Security defended its policy, saying temporary protected status was not meant to be permanent.

Read More
Miami archbishop calls for ‘compassionate’ protections for Haitians ahead of TPS deadline #Catholic Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski urged “compassionate” immigration protections for Haitians with temporary protected status (TPS) upon expiration of their automatic work‑permit extension.As “widespread violence, political instability, economic collapse, and humanitarian suffering” continue in Haiti, Wenski said July 24 that the Caribbean nation remains unsafe as a place for migrants to return. About 353,000 Haitian nationals hold TPS status in the U.S., according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).Miami’s archbishop said local ministries are “preparing for the consequences” of policy changes, including the termination of work authorizations for diocesan employees. Employment authorization documents (EADs) reached a court-extended expiration July 27.TPS is an immigration status granted to eligible foreign nationals from designated countries that are unsafe to return to due to ongoing conflict, environmental disasters, or other extraordinary conditions.The U.S. Supreme Court on June 25 ruled that DHS could end TPS for Haitians and Syrians. El Salvador’s TPS designation is set to expire Sept. 9.The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation (H.R. 1689) in April that would add three more years of TPS for Haitian nationals. The legislation has stalled in the Senate.Catholic Health Services (CHS), one of the Archdiocese of Miamiʼs largest ministries, which employs a significant number of Haitian workers who hold TPS, “is currently evaluating the effects of the recent federal changes affecting TPS work authorization, Wenski said.“At this time, an estimated 40 to 50 valued employees may be affected, although the final number remains under review as the organization works individually with each employee based on his or her unique circumstances,” he said.Haitian CHS workers “are more than employees — they are members of our Church and our community,” Wenski said. “They care for the sick, comfort the elderly, and serve some of the most vulnerable among us with compassion and dedication.”Ahead of the deadline, Wenski said “our hearts are with our Haitian brothers and sisters who are living with uncertainty, fear, and anxiety about what the future may hold for themselves and their families.”“The Church recognizes the right of nations to secure their borders and to establish just immigration laws. At the same time, our Catholic faith calls us to uphold the dignity of every human person and to accompany those who are vulnerable,” he said. As “Haiti continues to endure profound hardship,” Wenski urged “elected leaders to pursue compassionate and humane solutions that protect family unity and recognize the extraordinary circumstances facing the Haitian people.”“To our Haitian brothers and sisters: You are not alone. The Catholic Church walks with you,” he said.Haitian workers in Ohio face uncertain futureOhio bishops also have called for continued TPS protections for Haitians, especially as Springfield, Ohio, is home to a large Haitian population. The Catholic Conference of Ohio released a June statement urging action and continued TPS.As the Supreme Court decision has left many families worried about losing their jobs, Ohio-based organizations are also preparing to aid those facing loss of TPS.In an interview July 24 with “EWTN News Nightly,” Casey Rollins, executive director of St. Vincent de Paul in Springfield, Ohio, said the organizationʼs team helps immigrants and nonimmigrants “while theyʼre enduring, or while theyʼre navigating … a crisis or a situation.”“That would be, in this case, once they lost their jobs, we will help them take care of their rent and utilities if they now canʼt pay that,” she said.For “over 60 years, weʼve helped Americans with rent and utilities and those kinds of necessities for independent living. Now weʼre doing that with Haitians and other immigrants whoʼve recently lost jobs,” she explained.“We also are helping the families who, many of them, are certain to be deported,” she said.Following the loss of workers in the Ohio community, “weʼre going to be in trouble,” she said. For years, the area needed “more workers here,” and the Haitian community was “taking a lot of these jobs.”

Miami archbishop calls for ‘compassionate’ protections for Haitians ahead of TPS deadline #Catholic Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski urged “compassionate” immigration protections for Haitians with temporary protected status (TPS) upon expiration of their automatic work‑permit extension.As “widespread violence, political instability, economic collapse, and humanitarian suffering” continue in Haiti, Wenski said July 24 that the Caribbean nation remains unsafe as a place for migrants to return. About 353,000 Haitian nationals hold TPS status in the U.S., according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).Miami’s archbishop said local ministries are “preparing for the consequences” of policy changes, including the termination of work authorizations for diocesan employees. Employment authorization documents (EADs) reached a court-extended expiration July 27.TPS is an immigration status granted to eligible foreign nationals from designated countries that are unsafe to return to due to ongoing conflict, environmental disasters, or other extraordinary conditions.The U.S. Supreme Court on June 25 ruled that DHS could end TPS for Haitians and Syrians. El Salvador’s TPS designation is set to expire Sept. 9.The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation (H.R. 1689) in April that would add three more years of TPS for Haitian nationals. The legislation has stalled in the Senate.Catholic Health Services (CHS), one of the Archdiocese of Miamiʼs largest ministries, which employs a significant number of Haitian workers who hold TPS, “is currently evaluating the effects of the recent federal changes affecting TPS work authorization, Wenski said.“At this time, an estimated 40 to 50 valued employees may be affected, although the final number remains under review as the organization works individually with each employee based on his or her unique circumstances,” he said.Haitian CHS workers “are more than employees — they are members of our Church and our community,” Wenski said. “They care for the sick, comfort the elderly, and serve some of the most vulnerable among us with compassion and dedication.”Ahead of the deadline, Wenski said “our hearts are with our Haitian brothers and sisters who are living with uncertainty, fear, and anxiety about what the future may hold for themselves and their families.”“The Church recognizes the right of nations to secure their borders and to establish just immigration laws. At the same time, our Catholic faith calls us to uphold the dignity of every human person and to accompany those who are vulnerable,” he said. As “Haiti continues to endure profound hardship,” Wenski urged “elected leaders to pursue compassionate and humane solutions that protect family unity and recognize the extraordinary circumstances facing the Haitian people.”“To our Haitian brothers and sisters: You are not alone. The Catholic Church walks with you,” he said.Haitian workers in Ohio face uncertain futureOhio bishops also have called for continued TPS protections for Haitians, especially as Springfield, Ohio, is home to a large Haitian population. The Catholic Conference of Ohio released a June statement urging action and continued TPS.As the Supreme Court decision has left many families worried about losing their jobs, Ohio-based organizations are also preparing to aid those facing loss of TPS.In an interview July 24 with “EWTN News Nightly,” Casey Rollins, executive director of St. Vincent de Paul in Springfield, Ohio, said the organizationʼs team helps immigrants and nonimmigrants “while theyʼre enduring, or while theyʼre navigating … a crisis or a situation.”“That would be, in this case, once they lost their jobs, we will help them take care of their rent and utilities if they now canʼt pay that,” she said.For “over 60 years, weʼve helped Americans with rent and utilities and those kinds of necessities for independent living. Now weʼre doing that with Haitians and other immigrants whoʼve recently lost jobs,” she explained.“We also are helping the families who, many of them, are certain to be deported,” she said.Following the loss of workers in the Ohio community, “weʼre going to be in trouble,” she said. For years, the area needed “more workers here,” and the Haitian community was “taking a lot of these jobs.”

Catholic Health Services, one of the Archdiocese of Miami’s largest ministries, faces losing an estimated 40 to 50 employees, Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski said.

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.”

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.”

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

Read More
Notre Dame awards religious liberty prize to Becket Fund for Supreme Court wins #Catholic Notre Dame Law School awarded its 2026 Prize for Religious Liberty to the Becket Fund — a nonprofit law firm that has secured 13 Supreme Court victories in the past 15 years defending the First Amendment’s religious liberty protections.“We’re deeply honored to be recognized with the religious liberty prize,” Becket President and CEO Mark Rienzi told EWTN News.“We’re honored to be able to be part of fighting to protect something that is very important for our country and the Church,” said Reinzi, who accepted the award at the July 8 conclusion of Notre Dame’s sixth annual Religious Liberty Summit in Chicago.Becket — established in 1994 to provide cost-free legal counsel to those whose religious liberties were violated — has an undefeated record at the Supreme Court.Its lawyers represented the Little Sisters of the Poor and Hobby Lobby against contraception mandates, defended the rights of Maryland parents to opt their children out of gender-related coursework that conflicted with their religious beliefs, and backed a Catholic foster care agency that only placed children with opposite-sex married couples.G. Marcus Cole, a dean and professor of law at Notre Dame, said during the award ceremony that when the university started giving out the award, “we always imagined that it would go to one person.”“But when we think about the Becket Fund, it is an entire team of lawyers, led by Mark Rienzi, who have made a difference in our world, who have made our lives better,” he said. “And for that reason, we thought it only appropriate to give the award to the Becket Fund as an entity."Ongoing fights for religious libertyThe most recent victory secured by Becket came in Mahmoud v. Taylor, which ensured parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, had a right to opt their children out of coursework that included material related to gender that conflicted with their religious faith.Rienzi told EWTN News that “parents don’t give up the right to [raise] their children when they drop their kids off at the schoolhouse gates.” He added: “Your children don’t belong to the state just because you use a public school.”Becket represented Catholic, Ethiopian Orthodox, and Muslim parents in the lawsuit. Rienzi said religious parents have a right to “operate equally as a full citizen and full member of the public” by utilizing the public school system while maintaining the right to instill religious values in their children.“[This was] the most important case in at least 50 or 100 years in establishing that principle,” he said.Becket also secured the 2020 victory for the Little Sisters of the Poor in which the Supreme Court ruled in favor of federal regulations that exempted the religious sisters from mandatory contraception coverage in insurance plans.The sisters, however, are back in court after the governments of Pennsylvania and New Jersey challenged those exemptions on separate grounds than those on which the court previously ruled. This case is now in an appellate court, which heard oral arguments on July 7. Becket is representing them again and Rienzi is the lead attorney on the case.“It’s outrageous that governments keep volunteering for the beating they get when they keep [going after] the Little Sisters of the Poor,” Rienzi said.He said “the law is really, really clear” that Pennsylvania cannot remove their exemptions from the mandate.Becket is also representing a coalition of Catholic preschools in Colorado that is suing the state because they were excluded from a “universal” tuition program. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case. Notre Dame awarded Becket the prize less than one week after Americans celebrated the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, which culminated in the adoption of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which secured religious freedom.“God created everybody equal and equally free and gave them rights,” Rienzi said, adding that religious freedom is “essential to the declaration’s idea of who we are as a country and … [it] is crucial for maintaining it.”“It’s a shame that you still have to fight about it,” Rienzi said. “But on the other hand, it’s worth fighting for.”

Notre Dame awards religious liberty prize to Becket Fund for Supreme Court wins #Catholic Notre Dame Law School awarded its 2026 Prize for Religious Liberty to the Becket Fund — a nonprofit law firm that has secured 13 Supreme Court victories in the past 15 years defending the First Amendment’s religious liberty protections.“We’re deeply honored to be recognized with the religious liberty prize,” Becket President and CEO Mark Rienzi told EWTN News.“We’re honored to be able to be part of fighting to protect something that is very important for our country and the Church,” said Reinzi, who accepted the award at the July 8 conclusion of Notre Dame’s sixth annual Religious Liberty Summit in Chicago.Becket — established in 1994 to provide cost-free legal counsel to those whose religious liberties were violated — has an undefeated record at the Supreme Court.Its lawyers represented the Little Sisters of the Poor and Hobby Lobby against contraception mandates, defended the rights of Maryland parents to opt their children out of gender-related coursework that conflicted with their religious beliefs, and backed a Catholic foster care agency that only placed children with opposite-sex married couples.G. Marcus Cole, a dean and professor of law at Notre Dame, said during the award ceremony that when the university started giving out the award, “we always imagined that it would go to one person.”“But when we think about the Becket Fund, it is an entire team of lawyers, led by Mark Rienzi, who have made a difference in our world, who have made our lives better,” he said. “And for that reason, we thought it only appropriate to give the award to the Becket Fund as an entity."Ongoing fights for religious libertyThe most recent victory secured by Becket came in Mahmoud v. Taylor, which ensured parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, had a right to opt their children out of coursework that included material related to gender that conflicted with their religious faith.Rienzi told EWTN News that “parents don’t give up the right to [raise] their children when they drop their kids off at the schoolhouse gates.” He added: “Your children don’t belong to the state just because you use a public school.”Becket represented Catholic, Ethiopian Orthodox, and Muslim parents in the lawsuit. Rienzi said religious parents have a right to “operate equally as a full citizen and full member of the public” by utilizing the public school system while maintaining the right to instill religious values in their children.“[This was] the most important case in at least 50 or 100 years in establishing that principle,” he said.Becket also secured the 2020 victory for the Little Sisters of the Poor in which the Supreme Court ruled in favor of federal regulations that exempted the religious sisters from mandatory contraception coverage in insurance plans.The sisters, however, are back in court after the governments of Pennsylvania and New Jersey challenged those exemptions on separate grounds than those on which the court previously ruled. This case is now in an appellate court, which heard oral arguments on July 7. Becket is representing them again and Rienzi is the lead attorney on the case.“It’s outrageous that governments keep volunteering for the beating they get when they keep [going after] the Little Sisters of the Poor,” Rienzi said.He said “the law is really, really clear” that Pennsylvania cannot remove their exemptions from the mandate.Becket is also representing a coalition of Catholic preschools in Colorado that is suing the state because they were excluded from a “universal” tuition program. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case. Notre Dame awarded Becket the prize less than one week after Americans celebrated the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, which culminated in the adoption of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which secured religious freedom.“God created everybody equal and equally free and gave them rights,” Rienzi said, adding that religious freedom is “essential to the declaration’s idea of who we are as a country and … [it] is crucial for maintaining it.”“It’s a shame that you still have to fight about it,” Rienzi said. “But on the other hand, it’s worth fighting for.”

Becket President Mark Rienzi said the group is “deeply honored” to be awarded the prize, saying religious liberty “is worth fighting for.”

Read More
Little Sisters argue contraception mandate case before 3rd Circuit as long fight continues #Catholic Legal counsel for the Little Sisters of the Poor delivered oral arguments to a federal appellate court on July 7 as the Catholic religious society continued its 15-year legal battle over contraception mandates.The dispute goes back to a 2011 federal regulation imposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which requires employers to include coverage of contraception in healthcare plans offered to employees, as part of rules implementing the Affordable Care Act.Although the Little Sisters of the Poor already won two Supreme Court cases — which found the federal government must protect the religious freedom of those who object to contraception and that the federal government has the authority to create exemptions — the attorneys general of Pennsylvania and New Jersey are challenging federal exemptions on grounds that the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on.A lower court ruled in favor of the two states, against the Little Sisters of the Poor, finding that the federal exemptions are arbitrary and capricious. The sisters filed an appeal, which is being considered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.Aimee Thomson, who represented the two states, argued that the broad exemptions — which allow both religious and moral objectors to avoid the mandate — are “arbitrary and capricious” and that the exemptions “swept well beyond all religious employers” who first objected to the mandate.Under the rule, employers who have moral or religious objections can opt in to an accommodation in which the federal government subsidizes contraception coverage in their plans. Employers who also have moral or religious objections to the accommodation can sidestep contraception coverage altogether.She told the panel of judges that the exemption exceeds the scope that is required under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). She said the regulators failed to show that these exemptions were necessary to solve the religious liberty issue and expressed concerns over employers potentially getting exemptions even though their objections are not sincere.Thomson said it’s unclear “how many women have been impacted” by insincere objections, but “expecting female employees” to study policies and litigate an employer’s insincere objections is burdensome.“That is an incredible burden to place on employees and on women,” she said.Mark Rienzi, president of Becket and lead attorney for the Little Sisters, argued that the federal government sought to “choose a middle ground” that created a mandate but protected religious freedom, based on Supreme Court guidance: “Nothing about that is even close to arbitrary and capricious.”“This law is about the federal government … accommodating religion with its own mandate,” he said.Rienzi said a rule does not become arbitrary and capricious just because the scope is “a hair more than what’s required” under RFRA.The Little Sisters of the Poor are also receiving support from the Department of Justice. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Eric McArthur argued on behalf of the federal government, in favor of the exemptions, saying RFRA does not require the exemptions to be the “bare minimum.”He said HHS chose to “set everything aside and take a fresh look at everything” and decided “an exemption was the most appropriate administrative response” to objections. He said this was adopted “as a policy matter … even if RFRA does not compel it.”McArthur argued there is “no good reason” for someone to insincerely request an exemption because the employer can request the accommodation “at zero cost.” Yet, if the court decides the exemptions are too broad, the court could strike down “one line in the rule” rather than “take down the entire rule,” as the two states have requested.Mother Loraine Marie Maguire of the Little Sisters of the Poor said in a statement after the oral arguments that the states’ lawsuit to eliminate the exemptions is threatening their mission to serve the poor and the elderly.“This is our God-given mission,” she said “For nearly 200 years we have welcomed the elderly poor and dying into our homes, and with the population of seniors rapidly growing we cannot allow a government lawsuit to stop us from carrying out our mission. Pennsylvania and New Jersey can keep fighting if they want. All we want is to keep serving.”

Little Sisters argue contraception mandate case before 3rd Circuit as long fight continues #Catholic Legal counsel for the Little Sisters of the Poor delivered oral arguments to a federal appellate court on July 7 as the Catholic religious society continued its 15-year legal battle over contraception mandates.The dispute goes back to a 2011 federal regulation imposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which requires employers to include coverage of contraception in healthcare plans offered to employees, as part of rules implementing the Affordable Care Act.Although the Little Sisters of the Poor already won two Supreme Court cases — which found the federal government must protect the religious freedom of those who object to contraception and that the federal government has the authority to create exemptions — the attorneys general of Pennsylvania and New Jersey are challenging federal exemptions on grounds that the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on.A lower court ruled in favor of the two states, against the Little Sisters of the Poor, finding that the federal exemptions are arbitrary and capricious. The sisters filed an appeal, which is being considered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.Aimee Thomson, who represented the two states, argued that the broad exemptions — which allow both religious and moral objectors to avoid the mandate — are “arbitrary and capricious” and that the exemptions “swept well beyond all religious employers” who first objected to the mandate.Under the rule, employers who have moral or religious objections can opt in to an accommodation in which the federal government subsidizes contraception coverage in their plans. Employers who also have moral or religious objections to the accommodation can sidestep contraception coverage altogether.She told the panel of judges that the exemption exceeds the scope that is required under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). She said the regulators failed to show that these exemptions were necessary to solve the religious liberty issue and expressed concerns over employers potentially getting exemptions even though their objections are not sincere.Thomson said it’s unclear “how many women have been impacted” by insincere objections, but “expecting female employees” to study policies and litigate an employer’s insincere objections is burdensome.“That is an incredible burden to place on employees and on women,” she said.Mark Rienzi, president of Becket and lead attorney for the Little Sisters, argued that the federal government sought to “choose a middle ground” that created a mandate but protected religious freedom, based on Supreme Court guidance: “Nothing about that is even close to arbitrary and capricious.”“This law is about the federal government … accommodating religion with its own mandate,” he said.Rienzi said a rule does not become arbitrary and capricious just because the scope is “a hair more than what’s required” under RFRA.The Little Sisters of the Poor are also receiving support from the Department of Justice. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Eric McArthur argued on behalf of the federal government, in favor of the exemptions, saying RFRA does not require the exemptions to be the “bare minimum.”He said HHS chose to “set everything aside and take a fresh look at everything” and decided “an exemption was the most appropriate administrative response” to objections. He said this was adopted “as a policy matter … even if RFRA does not compel it.”McArthur argued there is “no good reason” for someone to insincerely request an exemption because the employer can request the accommodation “at zero cost.” Yet, if the court decides the exemptions are too broad, the court could strike down “one line in the rule” rather than “take down the entire rule,” as the two states have requested.Mother Loraine Marie Maguire of the Little Sisters of the Poor said in a statement after the oral arguments that the states’ lawsuit to eliminate the exemptions is threatening their mission to serve the poor and the elderly.“This is our God-given mission,” she said “For nearly 200 years we have welcomed the elderly poor and dying into our homes, and with the population of seniors rapidly growing we cannot allow a government lawsuit to stop us from carrying out our mission. Pennsylvania and New Jersey can keep fighting if they want. All we want is to keep serving.”

The dispute stems from a 2011 federal rule requiring employers to include contraception coverage in employee health plans under the Affordable Care Act.

Read More
Procession urges dignity and respect for migrants at border crossing #Catholic Catholic bishops, clergy, and hundreds of faithful processed across the U.S.–Mexico border to celebrate the contribution of immigrants in America ahead of the 250th anniversary of the nation.
 
 Catholic bishops, clergy, and hundreds of faithful attended the Border Mass 250 at Sacred Heart Church in Nogales, Arizona, on June 26, 2026. | Credit: Photo courtesy of Brett Meister/Diocese of Phoenix
 
 “Weʼre here as shepherds and as pastors to walk with people, to listen to people, and to be well together with the people of God here at the border,” Bishop James Misko of Tucson, Arizona, said at the event.“We call ourselves Christians. To be called a Christian means to be like Christ — to be living a life as conformed to Christ as possible. And we know that justice is being in right relationship with God and one another,” Misko said.Organized by the dioceses of Tucson and Phoenix in partnership with the Kino Border Initiative, the Hope Border Institute, and the Center for Migration Studies, the June 26 event included a conversation on immigration with U.S. Catholic bishops, Mass at Sacred Heart Church in Nogales, Arizona, and a rosary procession across the international line.The pastoral conversation on migration and human dignity “was a great conversation with five bishops about what the Church holds to be true when it comes to migration and human dignity,” Misko said.Misko and Bishop John Dolan of Phoenix were joined in conversation by Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe, New Mexico; Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso, Texas; and Bishop Emeritus Gerald Kicanas of Tucson.
 
 Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso, Texas; Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe, New Mexico; Bishop James Misko of Tucson, Arizona; Bishop John Dolan of Phoenix; and Bishop Gerald Kicanas of Tucson, Arizona, gather for the Border Mass 250 in Nogales, Arizona on June 26, 2026. | Credit: Photo courtesy of Brett Meister/Diocese of Phoenix
 
 “As we mark the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, we are reminded that we are made by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. Theyʼre given by God,” Seitz said at the event.“That is a fundamental reality that we in the Church always have in mind and that no policy, no executive order or Supreme Court decision can take away,” Seitz said.After the bishops celebrated Mass, the procession began at the Arizona parish and concluded at Parroquia De Pa Purísima Concepción — a Catholic church in Nogales, Sonora, Mexico. The group ended the event with a meal with migrants hosted by the Kino Border Initiative.Mexican bishops José Luis Cerra Luna of Nogales and Enrique Sanchez Martinez of Mexicali also participated in the binational event.
 
 U.S. and Mexican bishops celebrate the Border Mass 250 at Sacred Heart Church in Nogales, Arizona, on June 26, 2026. | Credit: Photo courtesy of Brett Meister/Diocese of Phoenix
 
 U.S. bishops have ‘almost complete unanimity’ on immigration matter“What is discouraging for me is that as a country, we have not yet been able to address the issue of immigration,” Kicanas said. “The conference of bishops has been clamoring, crying out, for comprehensive immigration reform, and we have not yet been able to accomplish that.”“We have to address the immigration policy of our country — as [do] most countries around the world today. Itʼs a serious concern. All of us want this situation to improve,” Kicanas said.
 
 Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso, Texas; Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe, New Mexico; Bishop John Dolan of Phoenix; and Bishop James Misko of Tucson, Arizona, lead the Border Mass 250 rosary procession from Nogales, Arizona, to Nogales, Sonora, Mexico, on June 26, 2026. | Credit: Photo courtesy of Brett Meister/Diocese of Phoenix
 
 “The bishops have been advocating for comprehensive immigration reform for a long, long time,” and Border Mass 250 “was just one more example of that,” Wester said.The event followed other calls for reform including pastoral letters on immigration and a special message from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops highlighting their opposition to “the indiscriminate mass deportation of people.”The bishops approved the message at their 2025 fall plenary assembly on Nov. 12, 2025, where the motion passed with support from more than 95% of the American bishops who voted.“One of the key principles of Catholic social teaching is solidarity — that weʼre together,” Wester said. “But this is an issue, Iʼd say, that enjoys almost complete unanimity in the bishops’ conference.”The bishops are addressing the matter as communities across the country “are looking for a clear moral response to the human cost of mass detention and deportation,” Dylan Corbett, executive director at Hope Border Institute, told EWTN News.“In union with Pope Leo XIV, who will soon go to Lampedusa, the border Mass in Nogales was a way for the Catholic community to name the suffering, affirm the dignity of those affected by these policies, and commit to working for reform,” said Corbett, who is also a member of the Vatican Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development.“In this moment, moral clarity must be matched by ongoing action that recognizes the contributions of immigrants to our country and the urgent need to work for justice,” he said.

Procession urges dignity and respect for migrants at border crossing #Catholic Catholic bishops, clergy, and hundreds of faithful processed across the U.S.–Mexico border to celebrate the contribution of immigrants in America ahead of the 250th anniversary of the nation. Catholic bishops, clergy, and hundreds of faithful attended the Border Mass 250 at Sacred Heart Church in Nogales, Arizona, on June 26, 2026. | Credit: Photo courtesy of Brett Meister/Diocese of Phoenix “Weʼre here as shepherds and as pastors to walk with people, to listen to people, and to be well together with the people of God here at the border,” Bishop James Misko of Tucson, Arizona, said at the event.“We call ourselves Christians. To be called a Christian means to be like Christ — to be living a life as conformed to Christ as possible. And we know that justice is being in right relationship with God and one another,” Misko said.Organized by the dioceses of Tucson and Phoenix in partnership with the Kino Border Initiative, the Hope Border Institute, and the Center for Migration Studies, the June 26 event included a conversation on immigration with U.S. Catholic bishops, Mass at Sacred Heart Church in Nogales, Arizona, and a rosary procession across the international line.The pastoral conversation on migration and human dignity “was a great conversation with five bishops about what the Church holds to be true when it comes to migration and human dignity,” Misko said.Misko and Bishop John Dolan of Phoenix were joined in conversation by Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe, New Mexico; Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso, Texas; and Bishop Emeritus Gerald Kicanas of Tucson. Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso, Texas; Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe, New Mexico; Bishop James Misko of Tucson, Arizona; Bishop John Dolan of Phoenix; and Bishop Gerald Kicanas of Tucson, Arizona, gather for the Border Mass 250 in Nogales, Arizona on June 26, 2026. | Credit: Photo courtesy of Brett Meister/Diocese of Phoenix “As we mark the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, we are reminded that we are made by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. Theyʼre given by God,” Seitz said at the event.“That is a fundamental reality that we in the Church always have in mind and that no policy, no executive order or Supreme Court decision can take away,” Seitz said.After the bishops celebrated Mass, the procession began at the Arizona parish and concluded at Parroquia De Pa Purísima Concepción — a Catholic church in Nogales, Sonora, Mexico. The group ended the event with a meal with migrants hosted by the Kino Border Initiative.Mexican bishops José Luis Cerra Luna of Nogales and Enrique Sanchez Martinez of Mexicali also participated in the binational event. U.S. and Mexican bishops celebrate the Border Mass 250 at Sacred Heart Church in Nogales, Arizona, on June 26, 2026. | Credit: Photo courtesy of Brett Meister/Diocese of Phoenix U.S. bishops have ‘almost complete unanimity’ on immigration matter“What is discouraging for me is that as a country, we have not yet been able to address the issue of immigration,” Kicanas said. “The conference of bishops has been clamoring, crying out, for comprehensive immigration reform, and we have not yet been able to accomplish that.”“We have to address the immigration policy of our country — as [do] most countries around the world today. Itʼs a serious concern. All of us want this situation to improve,” Kicanas said. Bishop Mark Seitz of El Paso, Texas; Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe, New Mexico; Bishop John Dolan of Phoenix; and Bishop James Misko of Tucson, Arizona, lead the Border Mass 250 rosary procession from Nogales, Arizona, to Nogales, Sonora, Mexico, on June 26, 2026. | Credit: Photo courtesy of Brett Meister/Diocese of Phoenix “The bishops have been advocating for comprehensive immigration reform for a long, long time,” and Border Mass 250 “was just one more example of that,” Wester said.The event followed other calls for reform including pastoral letters on immigration and a special message from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops highlighting their opposition to “the indiscriminate mass deportation of people.”The bishops approved the message at their 2025 fall plenary assembly on Nov. 12, 2025, where the motion passed with support from more than 95% of the American bishops who voted.“One of the key principles of Catholic social teaching is solidarity — that weʼre together,” Wester said. “But this is an issue, Iʼd say, that enjoys almost complete unanimity in the bishops’ conference.”The bishops are addressing the matter as communities across the country “are looking for a clear moral response to the human cost of mass detention and deportation,” Dylan Corbett, executive director at Hope Border Institute, told EWTN News.“In union with Pope Leo XIV, who will soon go to Lampedusa, the border Mass in Nogales was a way for the Catholic community to name the suffering, affirm the dignity of those affected by these policies, and commit to working for reform,” said Corbett, who is also a member of the Vatican Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development.“In this moment, moral clarity must be matched by ongoing action that recognizes the contributions of immigrants to our country and the urgent need to work for justice,” he said.

The Border Mass 250 included a conversation on immigration with U.S. Catholic bishops, celebration of a Mass, and a rosary procession across the international line.

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.”

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.”

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