null / Credit: SibRapid/Shutterstock
Denver, Colorado, Nov 1, 2025 / 07:19 am (CNA).
Here is a roundup of recent pro-life and abortion-related news.
7 in 10 voters support requiring doctor’s visit for abortion pills
More than 7 in 10 voters believe a doctor’s visit should be required for a chemical abortion prescription, a recent poll found.
The McLaughlin & Associates poll of 1,600 participants found that 71% of voters approved of a proposal “requiring a doctor’s visit in order for the chemical abortion drug to be prescribed to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.”
The poll also found that 30% of voters had “significant concerns” about the safety of the abortion pill.
Current federal regulations allow providers to prescribe abortion drugs through telehealth and send them by mail.
States like California even allow anonymous prescription of the abortion pill, and states including New York and California have “shield laws” that protect abortion providers who ship drugs into states where it is illegal.
SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said this week, “The harmful impact of Biden’s FDA removing safeguards on abortion drugs, like in-person doctor visits, is an issue that overwhelmingly unites voters of all stripes.”
“As a growing body of research indicates these drugs are far more dangerous than advertised, and new horror stories emerge day after day of women coerced and drugged against their will, landing in the ER and even dying along with their babies, Americans’ concerns are more than valid,” she said in an Oct. 28 statement.
Dannenfelser urged the Trump administration to “heed the emerging science and the will of the people and immediately reinstate in-person doctor visits.”
Texas AG Paxton secures win in Yelp’s targeting of pregnancy centers
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton secured an appellate court victory against Yelp, Inc. for allegedly adding misleading notices to pro-life pregnancy centers.
Paxton filed the lawsuit after misleading notices were attached to the pages of crisis pregnancy centers. The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s dismissal, which had concluded that Texas did not have jurisdiction over Yelp because it is based in California.
The 15th U.S. Court of Appeals concluded this week that the company is still “subject to specific jurisdiction in Texas” and that the concern is relevant to other states as well.
“As evidenced by the number of attorneys general who signed the letter sent to Yelp, several states share Texas’s interest in ensuring that Crisis Pregnancy Centers are not the targets of actionable misleading statements,” Justice April Farris wrote in the opinion.
Paxton said in a statement that Yelp tried to “steer users away from pro-life resources,” noting that Texas will keep Yelp accountable.
Paxton pledged to “continue to defend pro-life organizations that serve Texans and make sure that women and families are receiving accurate information about our state’s resources.”
Virginia superintendent denies that staff facilitated student abortions
A Virginia public school district has denied allegations that staff at a high school facilitated student abortions without parental consent or knowledge.
In an Oct. 16 letter to families and staff at Centreville High School, Fairfax County Superintendent Michelle Reid said that internal investigations found that the “allegations are likely untrue” as “new details have emerged.”
In the wake of an investigative report by a local blogger and accusations by a teacher on staff, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin instructed police to launch a criminal investigation. U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee as well as the U.S. Department of Education also launched investigations.
Reid said that “such behavior would never be acceptable” in the school district, which “is fully cooperating with these government investigations.”
Planned Parenthood Wisconsin resumes abortions
After a temporary pause this month, Wisconsin Planned Parenthood resumed providing abortions in the state by giving up its designation as an “essential community provider” under the Affordable Care Act.
Planned Parenthood Wisconsin stopped offering abortions on Oct. 1, after President Donald Trump cut federal Medicaid funding for abortion providers. The yearlong pause is designed to prevent federal tax dollars from subsidizing organizations that provide abortions.
Heather Weininger, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, said, “Planned Parenthood’s abortion-first business model underscores why taxpayer funding should never support organizations that make abortion a priority.”
“Women in difficult circumstances deserve compassionate, life-affirming care — the kind of support the pro-life movement is committed to offering,” she said in an Oct. 27 statement.
Ohio cuts medicaid contract with Planned Parenthood
Ohio has terminated Medicaid provider contracts with Planned Parenthood, preventing state funds from going to the abortion giant there.
The Ohio Department of Medicaid cited Trump’s recent yearlong pause on Medicaid reimbursements to abortion providers as the reason for termination. Planned Parenthood has since requested a hearing with the department to oppose the termination. Whether the state’s decision to end the agreement will extend longer than the federal pause is unclear.
Read More
![State-level religious freedom protections grow in recent years #Catholic
Thirty states have adopted some version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) first signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. / Credit: Leigh Prather/Shutterstock
Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 21, 2025 / 17:56 pm (CNA).
Protections for religious freedom in the U.S. have grown in recent years with multiple states adopting laws to strengthen the constitutional right to freely exercise one’s religion.As of 2025, 30 states have adopted a version of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) or similar legislative protection for religious freedom. The most recent states to adopt those protections for state-level laws were Georgia and Wyoming in 2025 and Iowa, Utah, and Nebraska in 2024. West Virginia and North Dakota adopted them in 2023 and South Dakota and Montana did the same in 2021.RFRA was first adopted in 1993, when then-President Bill Clinton signed it into law to expand religious freedom protections. Under the law, the federal government cannot “substantially burden” the free exercise of religion unless there is a “compelling government interest” and it is carried out in the “least restrictive” means possible.Congress passed the law in response to the 1990 Supreme Court decision in Employment Division v. Smith, which asserted that the First Amendment was not violated as long as a law was “neutral and generally applicable.” The law was intended to provide a stronger safeguard for the free exercise of religion than what was provided by the highest court. Bipartisan consensus gone, but opposition weakeningWhen RFRA was adopted at the federal level in the 1990s, the protections had overwhelming bipartisan support. In the 2010s, that bipartisan consensus waned as most Democrats voiced opposition to the protections.Tim Schultz, the president of the 1st Amendment Partnership, told CNA that in 2013, two states adopted RFRA with nearly unanimous support from Republicans and about two-thirds support from Democrats. However, the law became more divisive after the 2014 Supreme Court ruling in favor of exempting Hobby Lobby from a mandate to provide abortifacient drugs based on RFRA.“That [bipartisan support] seems like a million years ago,” Schultz said. “Now I would say Republican support is about the same as it was then. Democratic support is under 5%.”Although Schultz did not express optimism that bipartisan support could return any time soon, he credited some cultural shifts for the strong success in Republican-leaning states over the past four years.From 2014 through 2020, he said business groups and LGBT groups “were working together very strongly … in opposition to religious freedom bills” because they saw them as threats to certain anti-discrimination laws related to workplace policies from religious employers.However, post-2020, he said, “the politics of RFRA are far more favorable,” and he noted there has been “far less opposition from business groups.”One reason for this change, according to Schultz, was the widely-published story of NCAA championship swimmer Lia Thomas, a biologically male swimmer who identified as a transgender woman and competed in women’s sports. This led polling to “change on every issue related to LGBT,” he noted.Another reason, he argued, was the response to transgender-related policies by Target and the Bud Light ads, which led to “consumer anger at both of them.” He noted the money lost by the corporations “made business groups say ‘we are not going to have the same posture.’”In spite of the partisanship that fuels the current debate, Schultz noted RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on a wide range of issues, some of which have pleased conservatives and others that have pleased progressives.Although RFRA has been used to defend religious freedom on issues related to contraception, abortion, gender, and sexuality, it has also been used to defend religious organizations that provide services for migrants. “[RFRA is] not politically predictable,” Schultz said.](https://unitedyam.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/state-level-religious-freedom-protections-grow-in-recent-years-catholic-thirty-states-have-adopted-some-version-of-the-religious-freedom-restoration-act-rfra-first-signed-into-law-by-president.webp)
