Vote

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.
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.

unitedyam

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
Massachusetts lawmakers pass bill removing all restrictions from abortion throughout pregnancy #Catholic The Massachusetts government this week moved to strip all restrictions from abortion and allow the procedure up until birth so long as a doctor approves of it.The state Senate passed Bill H.5595 on July 31, a little over a week after the state House passed the same measure. The bill now awaits Democratic Gov. Maura Healey’s signature. The legislation removes all of the state’s current restrictions on abortion after 24 weeks, instead dictating that a late-term abortion may be done based upon “the professional judgment of the physician” performing it. Current state law, which H.5595 would change, only allows late-term abortions if they are necessary to preserve the life or “physical or mental health” of the mother, or if the baby has been diagnosed with a fatal condition. Abortions are also allowed to be performed in the state if a baby would require “extraordinary medical interventions” to survive after birth. If signed into law, the bill would make Massachusetts the 11th state to impose no limits whatsoever on abortion. Healey, who has served as the state’s governor since 2023, is an outspoken supporter of abortion. The passage of the bill drew rebuke from SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser, who said in a July 31 statement that the state’s already-generous abortion policy “isn’t enough for Democrats whose party holds the position of no limits on abortion whatsoever.”“These extreme laws that only 10% of Americans support are enabled by the ‘states-only’ philosophy on abortion,” she argued. “The GOP must abandon the failed ‘leave it to the states’ position and move the country toward a national protection for unborn children across this nation,” she said. Ahead of the July 31 vote, the state’s Catholic bishops had also criticized the measure. “The proposed elimination of any legal restraint on late-term abortion is, in our judgement, a radical measure which is gravely immoral,” the bishops’ July 29 statement read. The bishops urged Catholics “to pray for a renewal of reverence for all human life.”
Read More

Massachusetts lawmakers pass bill removing all restrictions from abortion throughout pregnancy #Catholic The Massachusetts government this week moved to strip all restrictions from abortion and allow the procedure up until birth so long as a doctor approves of it.The state Senate passed Bill H.5595 on July 31, a little over a week after the state House passed the same measure. The bill now awaits Democratic Gov. Maura Healey’s signature. The legislation removes all of the state’s current restrictions on abortion after 24 weeks, instead dictating that a late-term abortion may be done based upon “the professional judgment of the physician” performing it. Current state law, which H.5595 would change, only allows late-term abortions if they are necessary to preserve the life or “physical or mental health” of the mother, or if the baby has been diagnosed with a fatal condition. Abortions are also allowed to be performed in the state if a baby would require “extraordinary medical interventions” to survive after birth. If signed into law, the bill would make Massachusetts the 11th state to impose no limits whatsoever on abortion. Healey, who has served as the state’s governor since 2023, is an outspoken supporter of abortion. The passage of the bill drew rebuke from SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser, who said in a July 31 statement that the state’s already-generous abortion policy “isn’t enough for Democrats whose party holds the position of no limits on abortion whatsoever.”“These extreme laws that only 10% of Americans support are enabled by the ‘states-only’ philosophy on abortion,” she argued. “The GOP must abandon the failed ‘leave it to the states’ position and move the country toward a national protection for unborn children across this nation,” she said. Ahead of the July 31 vote, the state’s Catholic bishops had also criticized the measure. “The proposed elimination of any legal restraint on late-term abortion is, in our judgement, a radical measure which is gravely immoral,” the bishops’ July 29 statement read. The bishops urged Catholics “to pray for a renewal of reverence for all human life.”

unitedyam

The measure, if signed by Democratic Gov. Maura Healey, will remove the last few restrictions on abortion in the state and replace them with “the professional judgment of the physician.”

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.
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.

unitedyam

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

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

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

unitedyam

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

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

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

unitedyam

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

Read More