/
RSS Feed
Episode Description
With 23 pro-lifers pardoned last week, we talk with Paul Vaughn, father of 11, who was arrested for praying outside an abortion clinic in Tennessee. Offering a gripping account of his journey from FBI agents arriving at his home to his sentencing to his pardon, Vaughn says his Christian faith carried him through the entire adversity.
After a contentious RFK hearing on Capitol Hill, Mary Fiorito answers the question the HHS nominee had difficulty answering. She clarifies that yes, all states with pro-life laws require life-saving care for pregnant women suffering from miscarriage and other complications, as a recent study by the Charlotte Lozier Institute confirms. All 23 states with strong pro-life laws also have regulations in place to facilitate timely medical treatment necessary to save a pregnant woman’s life.
We also check in with Becket senior counsel Will Haun as the Supreme Court is expected to take up a very important case that is bringing parents of all faiths together in Maryland. Together they are fighting for their rights as the primary educators of their children to opt out of lessons that involve gender ideology books for children as young as kindergarten. Maryland’s Board of Education took away parental notice for these story books that celebrate explicit sexual content. The gender and sexual ideology is being presented to children as young as ages 3 and 4.
Msgr. Roger Landry also offers an inspiring homily to prepare us for the Presentation of the Lord.
Bios
Paul Vaughn is a Christian husband, father of eleven children, small business owner in Centerville, Tennessee. He was convicted of violating the FACE Act in a peaceful protest involving prayer, singing, and hymns outside an abortion clinic near Nashville in March, 2021. Armed FBI agents later stormed his home and handcuffed him at gunpoint. Prosecutors unsuccessfully sought a one-year prison sentence. Vaughn was represented by Steve Crampton of the religious liberty law firm, Thomas Moore Society, and ultimately sentenced to three years of supervised release in July of 2024. He was attending a press conference on January 23rd this year when he learned President Trump had pardoned the 23 convicted pro-life activists, some who were elderly and infirmed women. Paul and his wife often teamed up to counsel pregnant women from sidewalks outside abortion clinics, offering them shelter, clothing, and other assistance they could provide. “Whatever we could do to help.”
Mary FioRito is an attorney, public speaker, radio show and podcast host, and an EPPC Cardinal Francis George Fellow, specializing in human life issues, abortion law, and ethics of life. She has a degree in English Literature from Loyola University Chicago, and a Juris Doctor from Loyola School of Law. She served as Director of Pro-life Activities for the Archdiocese of Chicago, and was named the first female Vice Chancellor for the diocese in 2000. Newsweek Magazine named her one of their “Women of the New Century,” and she received the “Woman of the Year Award” from St. Joseph College Seminary. Her writings have been published in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Chicago Tribune, Newsweek, National Review, and many religious publications. She is a contributing author to two books and has appeared on major Chicago news outlets as well as NPR, EWTN, and local and national religious media. As a Cardinal George Fellow at the deNicola Center for Ethics and Culture at Notre Dame, she advises on the Women and Children First initiative. Mary resides in Chicago with her husband and three daughters.
William J. Haun is Senior Counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and a Nonresident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). He previously practiced appellate and antitrust law at two international law firms and served as a law clerk in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. He is a prolific writer and speaker on constitutionalism, self-government, and the role of religion in preserving freedom. He has appeared on national media outlets like CNN and Fox News, and his writings have been published in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post and many others. He earned his J.D. from The Catholic University of America, and his B.A. in political science from American University, graduating cum laude from both. He serves on the boards of Divine Mercy Academy and Benedictine College’s Center for Constitutional Liberty, and he is a Knight of Merit in the Sacred Military Constantinian Order of St. George.
Monsignor Roger Landry is a priest of the Diocese of Fall River, Massachusetts. He writes for numerous publications, speaks on radio and TV, and is the author of the book, Plan of Life: Habits to Help You Grow Closer to God. A graduate of Harvard and the Pontifical North American College in Rome, he served as Attaché to the Holy See’s Permanent Observer Mission to the UN in New York. Father Landry traversed the full 1500-mile Eucharist Pilgrimage in 2024 and joined the historic Eucharistic Congress in Indianapolis, an event which coincided with his 25th year in the priesthood. He was recently appointed the new National Director of the Pontifical Mission Societies in the USA.
The following transcript is machine generated.
Episode 302 Transcript
| Ashley | Hello friends, and welcome to Conversations with Consequences. We are the radio show and podcast of the Catholic Association where we aim to change the culture one conversation at a time. You can listen to conversations with consequence, says on the EWTN Global Catholic Radio Network Saturday mornings at 7 a.m. Eastern, or catch the encore at 5 p.m.. We are also on Sirius XM Channel 130. Of course, our radio show is also a podcast. Go to the Catholic Association dot org or directly to wherever you listen to your podcast. Welcome to Conversations with Consequences on EWTN Radio. I'm your hostess, Ashley McGuire, alongside a dear friend and frequent guest on our show, Mary Fiorito. Welcome back to the show, Mary. |
| Mary Fiorito | Well, thank you for having me. It's a pleasure to be with you again. |
| Ashley | And I'm very excited to announce that Mary is going to be joining the show as a guest co hostess. So we're very excited to have Mary. She is an Ethics and Public Policy Center fellow, where she's the cardinal Francis George fellow. Mary is an attorney, a public speaker, a radio show and podcast host in her own right and her areas of expertise are human life issues, primarily abortion, law and policy, post-abortion aftermath and the consistent ethic of life. So, Mary, welcome to the show. |
| Mary Fiorito | it's my pleasure, Ashleigh. It's so great to be joining you. I'm a big fan of the show and never dreamed I could actually be a co-host someday. So thank you. |
| Ashley | Well, we're thrilled to have you. And it's been a busy month with the March for Life just last Friday. And we have so much great news coming out of this current administration for the pro-life movement. I mean, we saw last week the pardoning of 24 pro-lifers who were unfairly jailed or arrested for praying outside of abortion clinics. And in just a few moments, we're going to speak with Paul Ryan, who is one of those pro-lifers, the one that I think his story is, you know, arguably the most famous. But first, we have big news this week with a big hearing on Capitol Hill, the hearing for Robert F Kennedy. And he was being grilled by both sides. He's the nominee to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. And there's been a lot of big moments throughout that entire hearing. But one that was sort of troubling and stood out was RFK, his inability to answer a very important question. So let's actually roll the tape right now. |
| Mary Fiorito | There's a 40 year old law that requires hospital EHRs accepting payment from Medicare to actually provide emergency care to patients. So let's say a woman experiencing a life threatening condition like a heart attack goes to the E.R. As a lawyer, you would agree that that federal law protects her right to emergency care, correct? |
| RFK Jr. | Yes. |
| Mary Fiorito | So now a pregnant woman with life threatening, bleeding from an incomplete miscarriage goes to the E.R. A let me rephrase that so you can hear a pregnant woman with a life threatening bleed, bleeding from an incomplete miscarriage goes to the E.R. and her doctor also determines that she needs an emergency abortion. But she's in a state where abortion is banned. You would agree also as an attorney, that federal law protects her right to that emergency care. Correct? |
| RFK Jr. | I don't know. I mean, the answer to that is yes. |
| Mary Fiorito | Let me ask you this. As an attorney, doesn't federal law preempt state law. |
| RFK Jr. | The federal constitution? I'm not. Every federal law preempts state laws. It could be unconstitutional. I'm just telling you I don't. |
| Mary Fiorito | I appreciate that. |
| Ashley | That was Senator Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada speaking with RFK. Now, I'm not sure what to make of his response. Mary, you're the expert on this. What did you what did you take on his sort of fumble of the question? |
| Mary Fiorito | Well, you know, this is you could look at it a couple different ways, actually. But the way I'm seeing it is this was a particularly contentious hearing. And from what I picked up from the Democratic senators who were questioning robert f kennedy Jr. Was that a lot of their questions were either very directly about abortion, abortion, access, abortion availability, abortion funding, or they were sort of done in the guise of being a question about something else. But they actually were questions about abortion. But, you know, all that being said, I'm sure he spent many hours preparing for this, but I was more than a bit surprised that he didn't know the answer to the question about Tyler. So Tyler is a federal law. It stands for Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. And essentially what it means is that any person who presents in an emergency room, including a woman in labor, which is why that's specifically noted in the title of the law, must be either having their medical condition resolved or stabilized is what the law says. And if the hospital doesn't have the capability or the capacity to treat whatever that emergency medical condition is, they can do a transfer of a patient. But it has to be done in accordance with all of those what are what are called these Tyler provisions. And so essentially what this was designed to do was to prevent hospitals, say, in very wealthy, affluent areas from taking, say, a woman who may have been traveling, may have been visiting family and was expecting a baby and for some reason goes into active labor or her water breaks or she's in some kind of real genuine medical emergency and presents at this hospital, although she doesn't have the insurance that these hospitals would normally carry, private hospitals, she might be a public aid recipient, for example. So it prevents those hospitals from what they call patient dumping. Right. From from just sending these people, these women, most likely a way to other hospitals because they know they're going to be a net loss to them in terms of their reimbursement because they don't have insurance. But what abortion advocates have tried to do is to sort of twist the model of law to force hospitals, including Catholic hospitals and Catholic doctors, into performing abortions, most often with cases that are called pram cases. So that stands for premature rupture of membranes so that it's when a woman's water might break at, say, the 1920, 21 week where you you're pretty clearly pre viability, but the woman isn't going to be able to sustain that pregnancy. And what the abortion advocates are trying to do is to force doctors and hospitals to mandate that abortion will then be the treatment, the appropriate treatment for that particular condition. When many physicians would do something called expectant management, they would they would hospitalize, but then wait and monitor very carefully for infection. And in some cases, they do have to intervene and deliver that baby early, knowing that baby is quite likely not going to survive. But that doesn't involve the baby's direct killing. That's the distinction and that's what I think they were trying to get Kennedy force them into answering. And again, maybe he just had kind of a lapse of memory, but I was quite shocked. He didn't have an already strong prepared answer to that question. He had to know it would have been coming. |
| Ashley | Well, and it also struck me as a real missed opportunity, I think, to clarify. I mean, there's just been so many lies and misconceptions. I feel like arguably our biggest challenge right now as pro-lifers is combating the endless torrent of lies about the implications of these pro-life laws at the state level. This idea that women are being denied life saving care and so kind of an unfortunate missed opportunity on that front. But we're so excited to have you and your incredible expertise joining our conversations here at Conversations with Consequences. So we're happy to have you with us. And we're looking forward to our next interview with Paul Horn, who is a pro-life hero and will we'll hear more about his story in just a moment. |
| Mary Fiorito | Well, and I'm looking forward to joining these conversation. And thank you again. |
| Ashley | We're so happy to have with us Paul Vaughan, who whose name has been in the news this past week for a great reason. He is a father of 11 from Tennessee and is also one of the 23 pro-life activists who were just pardoned by the Trump administration. Welcome to the show, Paul. |
| Paul Vaughan | Great to be with you, actually. |
| Ashley | So, Paul, I know I've I've heard and read about many of these pro-life activists from around the country who've been unjustly targeted by the Biden administration's Justice Department. But your story is the one that I think became the face of all of the stories. And that was because of the particular, I think, egregious nature of things here. You're home as I correctly correctly understand, was invaded by FBI agents as if you were, you know, a deep state member of Al Qaida and your crime was for praying outside of an abortion clinic. So, Paul, walk us through that morning and what happened to you and your family. |
| Paul Vaughan | You bet. Well, we are, you know, the morning of the raid and, of course, this took place actually, one of the components of this is the event in question in our case happened in March of 2021. The raid on our home and in front of my family did not happen until October of 2022. So 18 months are going by with no contact from the DOJ, nothing, you know, no indication there were any issues at all. I was not arrested the day of the event. I interacted with the police officers and actually helped them and communicated with them and spoke with them at length in the hallway about Romans 13 and the civil magistrate duty. And there were Christian officers. And so we had a great rapport and so obviously had no, you know, no thoughts at all of having some kind of reprisal show up at my door and and especially in the manner that it happened. So, you know, it's the Gestapo black booted raid that we hear so much about in Germany and under communism. But yet this was America. And, you know, unfolded on a cool October morning. I sent three of my kids out to get in the car to so I could take them to school. I was getting getting ready to go. And we're in an old farmhouse and all of a sudden the windows, you know, lead base windows on the front doors are rattling as there's banging on the house itself and yelling on the porch by the FBI agents, yelling, open up FBI. You know, a lot of things happened. It was fully armed, fully tactical raid. There were four men with longer and sidearms, bulletproof armor and no identification, but a Velcro, you know, FBI badge strapped across the front of their chest that you can buy on, you know, eBay, by the way. And as you know, you got a split second, right, While all of this was going on, I'm looking outside. I'm not seeing my kids. I'm seeing flashing lights. The banging is continuing on the door. And I'm trying to figure out what what is going on. I offer something like, Who are you looking for? Their response as I open the curtains and look out to see the guns actually pointed at me. The curtain on the front door as we're looking for you. They didn't identify me by name, so I knew that, Hey, you actually have the right person. They left it vague enough that there were still question about who they were and why they were there and who they were looking for, I think is just the spirit of God that put in my mind that I need to surrender to them and trust Him to work it out for the protection of my family and the safety of my wife and kids. There were seven of my 11 kids at home that morning, and the last thing I wanted was like a gunfight when we were unarmed and, you know, not looking for that. So I surrendered myself as I asked for identification. One froggy young guy with an attitude points to his Velcro badge, says this is all the ID you get. And they proceeded to put me in handcuffs and, you know, lead me out to the car. Did you have any additional conversation with them past that or did you ask to speak to your own counsel first, or how did you handle that piece of it? Sure. So once I was in the car, they sent my wife to get me a shirt because I was still got a t shirt on and she had the foresight enough to bring back her camera or phone. And as she came to the door, she turned the phone on. And you wouldn't believe the change in the attitude and the the weapons you know, weapons automatically get go on the other side of your body, remove from view of the camera. And their attitude is, well, I'm sorry, ma'am, versus the taunting that was going on before when she's asking what it's for and he's is we know you really want to know. You really want to know. And so that attitude changed. So I was in the car. They didn't tell my wife, my children or anyone there why they were there or where they were taking me or even confirm who they were. The cars are all unmarked and everything. And but they did show me a warrant once I was in the car, once I was there, locked away and safely in custody, they did pull up a computer screen and flash a warrant for me. And I had of course, I didn't have my glasses or any anything on me. They would let me take my wallet or anything under under federal whatever arrest or whatever the rules are. So I'll make out his face. And I'm like, okay, well, is pro-life related at least we got that right. And they will do what the rest of it in time and they will. Now, we did have an hour long conversation as they took me to Nashville and I talked with the officers a little bit about their their duty and potential need to look for a new job if this is what their job was going to entail in the future, you know, that kind of thing. But no legal discussion till I got the court appointed a pro-abortion lawyer at the federal courthouse and, you know, signed whatever they would bring me to get out of get out of prison so I could go let my wife know where I was and all that. |
| Ashley | So tell us about your trial, because it was, if I'm correct, another two years almost, until you actually received a sentencing. You were not sentenced to prison time, but you were still sentenced. And my understanding is that the government presented a very weak case. And so, first of all, were you just living at home during your trial? And what did you make of your trial itself? |
| Paul Vaughan | So the process is the punishment is the phrase to bring home to people. We hear that in political terms, but obviously it means something more to my family. From that moment in October of 2022 until we went to trial in January of 24. And then ultimately we're not sentenced until July of 24 of last year, until January 23rd. Last week, when Trump pardoned us, I was basically on parole that entire time. So you have pretrial release, which puts you under the control of the parole office and home inspections and reporting your annual your week, your monthly, I should say, salary. No traveling out in the middle district without permission. So even though I hadn't even been to court, have been found guilty yet, we had all these infringements of our liberty and things going on with my family. Remember, my kids left that morning, curled up in a ball crying and their father being kidnaped. And now we're forced to have federal agents coming to our house to inspect it and not even gone to court yet. Found guilty, but in the trial, the evidence was very weak, actually. Right. It was a very it was an eye opening experience for someone that's not been in the federal court system. And the way the amount of evidence that was kept out, specifically because it didn't make your case their case. All right. I think back to the The Liar liar movie, Your Honor. I object. Why? Because it was devastating to my case. Right. And that's a joke in a movie. But that is literally they operate how they operate. And that was and the judge granted all these things. So while I spoke for 20 minutes to the media, they gave they took eight words out. That seemed to link me with the people that block the door and use that as evidence against me while I stood in the hallway leaning against the wall, they took one picture out of a video that clearly showed people passing back and forth down that hallway. But one picture to say that I blocked a hallway or was part of blocking a hallway. And so that was the evidence they put up. And do remember the specifics actually in detail on that is I did not break face that day. I know. I'm aware of the law of face has been around, you know, my entire pro-life career, as you were. We were around before it came in and we knew the rules. I didn't block any doors. We sang hymns. We read Bible scriptures, and I talked to police officers. That was the extent of my physical activity that day by using the face. Remember, is a six month misdemeanor first offense. So even if I had sat down at a door, I'd be looking at a misdemeanor in six months. But what the government did is use this novel use of the Civil Rights Act from the 1800s designed for the KKK, and took that as a conspiracy against rights and applied it to face. In doing so, they did three things with that which was written up, by the way, by one of the DOJ lawyers as a tactic they could use against pro-lifers. But by doing so, it took a six month penalty and turned it into a decade long penalty, made a misdemeanor or a felony. And the real hope with this is that that civil rights law does not require, quote, an overt act of the underlying law. So I don't actually have to break face. I just have to be in the vicinity and in agreement ideologically with people that did break the face act. Well. |
| Mary Fiorito | Since the police are the court didn't allow you to present your exculpatory evidence in addition to what you've shared with us. Now, can you give us a little bit of background about this particular clinic and what motivated you to go there in the first place to speak for unborn children? |
| Paul Vaughan | And there were so there were people coming from from all around the nation that weekend event. So it was a pro-life event, kind of a regional event. Some of the old time Operation Rescue pro-lifers that are good friends that I've known for my entire life were coming to town. They were potentially looking at doing a rescue. There's only two clinics at the time. There's none now, praise God. But there were only two clinics at the time in Nashville, Planned Parenthood, and then Care from Clinic, which is where this particular event took place. Dr. International is the parent company for care of them and dictating international is there needs to be an exposé on this in and of itself. But they are an international conglomerate of organizations designed very specifically for population reduction in the world, the birth control. They make their own abortion, mechanical devices. They propagandize all, you know, birth control and abortion. And that is what they do. And so they're very notorious. This particular clinic had been in a lawsuit with Mount Julie, Tennessee. Once Malet Julie figured out they were doing abortions, there, they tried to get them out of their community. They didn't want them there. Ultimately, the city lost the lawsuit. Got it. I think a quarter million dollar judgment against the city. So that was some of the motivating factor there, just ones that were there that were difficult to get to, to actually reach the the clients going in because they're in this multi-use building. And so most Ministry of counseling and others that on the sidewalk by the street and you don't have very much access. And so those coming in the building to do the rescue were able to get closer in and be in the hallways there and talk to people. |
| Mary Fiorito | So they it sounds like they do. So surgical abortions there. Do you know the gestational limit that they had at this particular clinic. |
| Paul Vaughan | It's supposed to be in? I forget Mary's is either 12 or 16 weeks and I believe that I know it was at the time there was limits there. And interesting story, one one mom that came down the hallway that testified against us actually has her baby today. Wow. It's a what is she now? A little little over around three years old And there's social media post out here of her praising what a wonderful child she is. And now she's their light and all this stuff. But yet that day she was marching down the hall to kill her baby and and couldn't and ultimately didn't come back. |
| Ashley | So the decayed thing so interesting I you know, there's news this week that's really kind of rocking everybody's world which is this pause on on funding and I'm it'll be interesting to see if they actually really do the thorough audit that they're promising to do and that the acting director of HHS has said to do to clean out any kind of grants that we're giving to these types of organizations. So, Paul, were you told in advance that this pardon was coming? Did it blindside you? And did you know, you know, how many of these other activists did you know and what was your reaction to the news? |
| Paul Vaughan | So yes or no is the answer. We had Trump spoke at the NAMI last spring here in Nashville. We were in the audience when he spoke and he mentioned the case and promised, you know, a pardon at that time. And multiple times on the campaign trail, he had promised to pardon Thomas Moore. Society is our law firm, which has done a fabulous job representing us personally and multiple others in different cases In the pro-life arena, they put together a full blown docket of all the cases and kind of a history and, you know, legal brief for the or Trump's aides and whatnot to have and to get it into his hands. So we were very hopeful it was coming. We were, quite honestly, getting a little frustrated. There are others going on the G six years. Obviously, that was great and wonderful that they were pardoned. And then another day goes by and we're thinking, okay, were they going to make it political and try to do it during the March for Life or something? And I don't like the politics, but whatever they do it, you know, it's it's out of our hands. And and then I was on a panel with Thomas Moore doing a life and law conference there in D.C. And during the panel, we got notification that he had just signed the pardon for the pro-lifers. This is the day before the march. And so we were rejoicing, obviously, and and very excited and and very, very thankful. And now that we have a president that, you know, keeps his word and follows through with what he says we would do. |
| Mary Fiorito | How did your spiritual life change during all of this? From the time that of that incident in the hallway until the day you were pardoned, did your did you grow in your faith in a way you thought you might, or was it was it a struggle for you at times you're married? |
| Paul Vaughan | That is the number one best question ever in this whole deal. Everyone can identify with being upset at the FBI and upset at this and some of that. But I tell you, the we had a good friend, a Anglican pastor that we spoke to that he said, listen, he said this is going to be the best thing that ever happened to your life and the worst thing that ever happened, your life is that there's no two ways about it. You will grow spiritually. And he was absolutely right. Our family has grown, our faith has grown. We're just I can't imagine my life today without having gone through this with the strength and the growth and just the maturity it brought to our walk with God is an amazing thing. And and it's it's even hard to explain without having gone through it. But I hope, you know what, if anything comes out of this from our exposure is that it will encourage others and their faith and and to be to trust God, to be courageous and just to know that we're not battling it's flesh and blood. There's a spiritual battle in all of this, and we're going to be part of it. So that's exciting. |
| Ashley | There's a lot of mixed emotions right now in the pro-life movement. I think at this particular moment, people are feeling very energized and excited, as you say, because we have a president who's following through on his promises to the pro-life community and coming right out of the gate with strong strides. But, you know, at the state level, it's been we've had a lot of disappointments. You know, Mary and I are two people in the optimistic camp. But where do you see the future of the pro-life movement and especially as someone who's been boots on the ground for so long, You know, what's your message to pro-lifers today? |
| Paul Vaughan | Sure. And actually, a great question. I tell you, if you would've told me well, let's just go back to Face Act was a great dividing line in the pro-life movement. Right? You kind of have front line activists, people that were back in the eighties and nineties were sitting at doors doing rescues, and you had sidewalk counselors, people that didn't necessarily want to go to jail or risk going to jail, but they would be on the sidewalks. They would try to talk to women, maybe adopt babies, do this work. And then you had the rise of the crisis pregnancy centers and and you had that whole, you know, machine of support and help help ministry and used to prior to face. They all work together not perfectly but but there was a good unity in the pro-life movement. When face happened, everybody got scared and started running for, you know, political cover and legal cover. Quite honestly, crisis pregnancy centers were closed down If Operation Rescue came to town because their lawyers were telling them that, you're going to be, you know, found to be in collusion with them and you're going to your fundraising is going to dry up and all this. So we had that going on for the last 30 years in many different forms and fashions. But standing at the march and hearing one of the largest pro-life organizations talk about activists that were arrested at the door and having the vice president acknowledge their presence and standing with them and declaring that what was done to them was unjust and that there's a new time, you know, that the government is seeing this in a new way. I think there's multiple multifaceted events going on right now that are bringing some unity and some clarity to the pro-life movement that I think is going to be great. And yet we've had some some setbacks at the state level. But honestly, I think that is going to force us to push in a little bit further. |
| Ashley | Well, Paul, we we thank you and we think we thank you for your pro-life witness. We thank God for your pardoning for everything that you and your family has suffered unjustly. And we thank you for your time and joining us today. For our listeners to find out more about Paul Vaughan and the Saint Thomas Moore Society that has been representing him all these years. You can visit Saint I'm sorry visit Thomas Moore Society Morgue. And to learn more about the Catholic Association, you can find us at the Catholic Association Board. Everything we do in radio, TV, print and online. Paul, thank you so much for joining us today. |
| Paul Vaughan | Thanks for having me today. |
| Ashley | Welcome back to Conversations with Consequences here on EWTN Radio on your host is Ashley McGuire. And I'm delighted to have a guest with us today to talk about a very important case. This is a case that's very close to home for me, literally in in that it originated in my county, Montgomery County, Maryland. So we're very fortunate to have with us Will Haun. He is an attorney for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. Will works on national cases in defense of religious liberty for all faith traditions. And he's been before the Supreme Court and other federal and state appellate courts nationwide. And his litigation experience includes being a member of the Supreme Court team that prevailed 9 to 0 for Catholic social services in the case of Fulton, the city of Pennsylvania. Welcome to the show. Well. |
| Will Haun | It's my pleasure to be here. Thank you so much. |
| Ashley | So, Will, can you please break down this case that, you know, we just heard in the last few days the Supreme Court has granted cert. This is a case coming out of the public school system in Montgomery County, Maryland, and has to do with the rights of religious parents. Can you break down the details of this case for our listeners? |
| Will Haun | Sure. Absolutely. So Montgomery County, Maryland, is one of the largest school districts in Maryland, has 160,000 students. It's the most religiously diverse county in the United States of America. And based on that diversity, Montgomery County had a long standing policy of accommodating religious concerns, issues of religious belief and formation and conscience in its public schools. So if parents were concerned about a kind of instruction that a child was going to receive in the public schools, that would be a violation of their religious beliefs and religious upbringing. Montgomery County had a long history of accommodating that with alternative assignments and all sorts of things, even things like Valentine's Day or Halloween parties or alternative or giving students alternative reading assignments. This became a really important when in 2022 or beginning it was 2023 school year, Montgomery County introduced a series of books which we call the Pride Storybooks. These books start in pre-kindergarten and then go up to fifth grade. And they're designed to teach children kind of one sided views on sexual orientation and gender ideology. Questions, things like having a kindergartner identify or a pre-kindergarten or identify a lip ring or underwear at a pride parade, or having a third grader learn that gender doesn't need to make sense. And then if there are any questions about that asked in class that like if a child were to say, I thought you were born a boy, you're a boy or born a girl, you're a girl. The teacher's instructed to say or suggested to say by the board. That's hurtful. That's offensive. Doctors are only making a guess when you're born, only you know inside. These books were extremely controversial when they were introduced and a wide variety of religious families sought opt outs from the books consistent with that long policy that I mentioned, as well as Maryland Law, which requires opt outs from any instruction on human sexuality, as well as with the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the right of parents to direct their children's religious upbringing. Initially, Montgomery County Public Schools gave our our clients these parents in Montgomery County opt outs and told them when the books would be read in advance. But then in March of 2023, for reasons that were never publicly explained, the board just pulled the rug out from underneath. The parents, withdrew all the opt outs and said that going into this school year there would be no notice of when these books would be read. So you could never get a straight answer from your teachers on when the books would be read to the kids and that the parents would lose all of their ability to opt their children out of this instruction. This is illegal. It violates the U.S. Constitution. As I mentioned, it violates Maryland law and the board's longstanding practices. And we brought this case to restore the right of parents to direct their children's religious upbringing. And here that means to restore the right of all parents, to know and to opt their children out of this kind of religiously violative instruction. We represent a wide coalition of religiously diverse families, and for all of their religious differences, they agree that parents, not the state, are the primary educators of their children. And that's why the Supreme Court is going to take this case and we believe took this case and we believe we're going to prevail because that principle is deeply rooted in our history and tradition. |
| Ashley | So one of the things that struck me about this particular case was what you mentioned, that not only were they going to not allow the kids, the parents, to opt their children out, but they weren't even going to notify them. And, you know, I've written a book about gender ideology. I actually went and watched video footage of various school board meetings around the country where this came up, like there was a push to introduce these concepts. And a lot of it tended to revolve around, are we putting this in a sex ed class or are we putting this in a different which parents? You know, there's a long standing tradition of allowing parents to opt their kids out of or are we putting in like a health class which you can't opt out of? So was this case unique in that regard, or are there other public school districts around the country where they're doing the same thing? |
| Will Haun | Well, this is exactly why this case has such national importance, precisely because you can't get around marriage like not only Maryland law, but also the law in 46 other states or 47 states that allow for advance notice and opt outs when it comes to human sexuality education. And the board's response is, well, we're not teaching gender identity. When we're talking about gender identity, we're teaching sentence structure while we're teaching gender identity. So therefore it's okay. This is why the free exercise of religion prohibits religious discrimination from laws that are just trying to get around their discrimination by being subtle about it. That doesn't that doesn't get you around the First Amendment. And there are jurisdictions across the country where this is coming up. There's a case in Pennsylvania, for example, where the school board had a kind of de facto policy of allowing teachers to bring this kind of material into the classroom, even when it had no other relationship to what was going on. But you can't get around the national consensus or the First Amendment by simply relabeling what is highly ideological instruction as something else. |
| Ashley | Interesting. So for our listeners who are not constitutional lawyers, which is probably most of them. Can you break down exactly what the question is before the Supreme Court and what is the other side's response? |
| Will Haun | Sure. So the question is, are parents who everyone agrees the parents have the authority as parents in our history and tradition to direct their children's religious upbringing. And that right has been recognized repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court in a variety of contexts For a long time and even before the Supreme Court recognized it was recognized in our law for a long time. The question is whether or not that right is burdened when you send your children to public school and they're forced to learn things that would harm their religious formation. That's the question for the school board. Their view is once you send your children to public school, the school board can do essentially anything it wants in terms of teaching. Your remedy is before they go to school. If you don't like what the public schools are teaching. You can send your kid to homeschool. You can send your kid to a private school. Well, they should tell that to one of our clients like Grace Morrison, who has a child who has Down syndrome, along with other learning challenges. And it would cost roughly $25,000 a year to try to replicate the services that the public schools offer for her or the parents who just realistically have no choice. When I bought the public schools, when it comes to educating their children. And so the question is, do you as parents surrender all of your religious authority over your kids when you drop them off at public school? Do you just sit around and wait until your child is actually going to fight your religious beliefs before you could even try to get any kind of relief? And the answer is obviously no. The entire point of protecting a right is to make sure that it isn't violated. Not to wait until it's violated and then pick up the pieces later. |
| Ashley | You know, at former Attorney General Bill Barr in his autobiography that came out a couple of years ago, he writes that he has a chapter about public schools. And he makes an interesting point that I haven't been able to stop really thinking about, which is kind of the point you were just making about the woman who is like, I don't have any other options here, is that there's kind of like a blanket violation of the religious rights of parents. He talks a lot about this idea of a secular, a new secular religion. He's also given a famous speech at Notre Dame where he he fleshes out this idea that that, you know, kind of left wing ideology has become its own kind of secular religion. And it's being forced on on faith based families who do not have the option of going to a private school, maybe because for financial reasons or as you mentioned, their child has a disability and there is no other place where they can take their school, their child for an education. But I don't know. What do you think about that? |
| Will Haun | Yeah, I mean, I think it's really unfortunate here that Montgomery County, because it is the most religiously diverse county in the United States of America, and because it has such a large public school system, it really has an opportunity to lead here to show the kind of spirit of practical accommodation that reflects the reality of the United States, which is we've been a religiously diverse country since before our founding, and that's why there's this consensus on opt outs. That's why there's been this longstanding recognition of parental religious authority. And so it's really including right here where, as I said, Montgomery County Public Schools gave our parents notice in opt outs to these very books until March of 2023. So I think it's unfortunate that this this really unnecessary conflict has been created with the public schools and that that's been even more kind of sad in this case, because some of the facts we've shown show that, frankly, the teachers were not on board with this, that the elementary school principals issued a memo to the board before the books were released saying, look, you guys are cutting the parents out of this process. You're going to be shaming students who disagree. You're going to be doing forcing the teachers to say things. They're going to be dismissive of kids. Religious beliefs like this is not the way to proceed. And this is Montgomery County, Maryland. Right. And so this is being recognized. There. And nevertheless, the board forged ahead. And that's just really unfortunate. |
| Ashley | Speaking of shaming, I remember reading a story that when this lawsuit first came about, I think it was a group of maybe parents on the other side that were like doxing children and saying, you know, going on Twitter, going on social media and saying, these are some of the children of the families involved in this lawsuit. Find them, shame them. Has there been I mean, how are your clients doing? I mean, this is they've taken an incredibly courageous stand and it involves minors. And, you know, there's so much you know, there's so much especially fueled by social media, there's so much shaming, bullying, cyberbullying that goes on. How are your clients faring in in this current culture with with the courageous stand that they've taken? |
| Will Haun | Well, it definitely does take a lot of courage and frankly, it's inspiring. It's one of the things that's so inspiring about this case is as a husband and father myself, to just see other parents sticking up for their kids, which is really the bottom line for for them, this is about their kids and sticking up for their kids. And as a result, they're heroes for that. It you know, there have been challenges. But on the same token, they also know they're not alone. I mean, we represent a coalition of hundreds of families and that these this concern in Montgomery County was was widely held. I mean, if anything, it's funny, the board will say that one of the reasons why they withdrew opt outs was because too many people wanted them. I mean, there's a kind of lack of self-awareness in that kind of statement, but it also shows that there is strength in numbers. |
| Ashley | That was going to be one of my next question is why? Why do you think Montgomery County is is digging in so hard? I mean, they it would be so easy to just offer an accommodation and diffuse the whole situation. Do you have a theory as to why they're they're clinging to this all the way to the Supreme Court? |
| Will Haun | You know, I mean, I don't I mean, I will say that I think one of the things here is that there's been, I think, some confusion in the lower courts for a long time about whether or not parents surrender their rights as parents when they drop their kids off at public schools. And perhaps the board sees that confusion and wants to seize on it. But the bottom line here is that the Supreme Court has granted this case now, and they are in a position to tell the lower courts no, that enduring national tradition of parents not the state being the director, educators of their children and the public schools are meant to partner with parents and not cut them out. Is the real viable guarantee as a part of our constitutional traditions, and we're going to uphold it here. |
| Ashley | So one last question. We have a new administration and in his inaugural speech, the president directly referenced an executive order that I believe he may have just signed today about recognizing only two. He uses gender, the correct word as sexes, and I believe it has direct implications for schools. Would this in any way affect your case? |
| Will Haun | I don't think so. I mean, it's important here to emphasize that the parents in this case are not using this case to try to get these books out of the curriculum. This is not a challenge to the fact that Montgomery County adopted these books. It's not a demand that Montgomery County adopt different books. All it is is a challenge to Montgomery County to simply restore to the parents, to give back to them the very right to notice and opt out that they had. As to these books and everything else in the curriculum until March of 2023. So that's the that's the precise focus of this lawsuit. |
| Ashley | Well, I think you I think you as a mom of five kids and a taxpayer in Montgomery County, Maryland, I think this is just such an important case. And we wish you all the best with success, because the implications for this case, as you've pointed out for us, are so broad. I mean, this affects every parent's right to be the primary educator of their children. It affects families of all faiths who, you know, believe different things theologically, but agree in this foundational principle that is both a principle rooted in every faith, but also in in the American Constitution and in our principles and our values that parents are the primary educators of their children. So we hope to see that success in the Supreme Court and to see them validate that. And we think you will for your time. Where can our listeners find out and follow this case in your work at the Becket Fund? |
| Will Haun | Right. So you can go to the Becket Fund's website to get more information about this case, but Google the Becket Fund. Dot org and we should be there. I think just Google Becket Fund or go to Becket and you'll be able to find information there. |
| Ashley | Thank you, Will. |
| Will Haun | Thank you. |
| Ashley | And now Father Roger Landry offers us a thought provoking homily to prepare us for this Sunday's gospel. |
| Fr. Landry | Is Monsignor Roger Landry, national director of the typical Mission Society. It a privilege for me to be with you as together we enter into the consequential conversation Jesus wants to have with us this Sunday, when we will celebrate a great feast, one that's fixed 40 days after Christmas so that it can fall on any day of the week. It's rare, then, that the presentation of the Lord falls on a Sunday, which is a pity because ordinarily only daily mass growers have a chance to celebrate this feast and all that it means in Jesus life. And it's supposed to mean in your life and mine. Those who pray the rosary meditate upon this ministry at least twice a week. The fourth joyful mystery. But it's great for the whole church to celebrate this feast together so that we can encourage each other to obtain and in its fullness, what this holy mystery contains. The point of this feast is summarized in the beautiful instructions and prayers that are said just before that beautiful procession that always begins the mass on the presentation. These instructions and prayers frame the presentation fundamentally as an encounter. The priest says Today is the blessed day when Jesus was presented in the temple by Mary and Joseph. Outwardly, he was fulfilling the law, but in reality he was coming to meet his believing people. After describing Simeon and how they met him in the temple. The priest continues. So let us also gather together by the Holy Spirit. Proceed to the house of God to encounter Christ. There we shall find Him and recognize him in the breaking of the bread until he comes again revealed in glory. This awareness of the presentation as an encounter with Christ continues throughout the mass. The Eucharistic Preface. We pray that we too will go forth rejoicing to encounter yourselves, and at the end of mass we ask for the grace that we going forth to meet the Lord may obtain the gift of eternal life. All of these prayers convey that Jesus constantly being presented to us, and we are supposed to be constantly presenting ourselves to Him. The Christian life is meant to be a continuous mutual presentation, a lifetime encounter of love and life. The candles we bless at the beginning of mass are supposed to symbolize our burning love for Jesus. We ask God the Father to bless them precisely so that treading the path of virtue we pray. We may reach that light that never fails. Our encounter with the Lord and the feast of the presentation. And then in the mutual encounter of virtuous Christian life, it's meant to lead to an eternal encounter in the heavenly Temple. So that's what we're celebrating on the Feast of the Presentation and what that feast is meant to bring about in us. Concretely, however, the celebration also contains many practical applications to help us keep that ongoing encounter with Christ throughout our life as children, as young parents, and as those advanced in years. Let's ponder together those applications. We begin with seniors. How was it that Simeon and Anna, the two seniors in Sunday's gospel, recognized Jesus when he was brought to the temple? Among all the scores of babies brought to be presented in the temple that day, according to Lord Moses. How were they able to discern that the child wrapped in swaddling clothes in Mary's arms was the long awaited one? It's because they were present in the temple differently from everyone else. They were waiting for the Lord in the temple. They were longing for him. They were expecting him in holiness, in prayer. Having allowed the Lord to open their eyes, to realize that can only be seen with faith. Vision goggles. Saint Luke describes them. Simeon was righteous and devout, guided by the Holy Spirit, and anxiously awaiting Israel's consolation in the coming of the Messiah. Anna was a prophetess who, once she became a widow at 27, essentially married herself to God, never leaving the temple, worshiping God there by prayer and fasting night and day. For the previous 57 years, both lived looking toward God and awaiting His coming. They were both so in love with the Lord that they burst forth. Speaking of him to others. Simeon took Jesus in his arms, praise God, and then presented him not just to Israel as her glory, but to all the nations as their light in a As soon as she saw Jesus begin to praise God and begin to speak of Him to all who are looking for the redemption he had come to bring into the world. They were both advanced in years, but full of life because they were animated by the Holy Spirit and responsive to his action. Seniors are Christians of any age who likewise want to be full of life, have much to learn from seeming Indiana. Some can look at old age is a sad time, especially if one is a widow or widower. Others can regard it as a time just to have fun, to play as much golf as possible, to spend time on games, television, old cowboy in Indian movies and inconsequential hobbies. The best use of our later years is shown by Simeon and Anna. They use them to grow closer to the Lord by encountering him in prayer and time spent worshiping the Lord in this Holy temple. They used those years to reflect on their death and to live a life in loving expectation of Lord's coming. Simeon's words now a Lord, let your servant depart in peace. From my eyes have seen your salvation. Each of us should want to say at the end of our life, when the Lord Jesus comes for us. The Vespers of our life are also a time to speak of God to others, to pass on real wisdom, to present the Lord to those who don't see His presence, to show how He is the light shining in the midst of darkness, to manifest that loving and serving him as our greatest glory. I encourage those who are retired, who wish to live life, to the full in this world and the next to do all they can to imitate Simeon's and Anna's examples. Seeking to intensify their encounter with the Lord, responding to the Holy Spirit's promptings, drawing people to the temple, perhaps by starting to come each day for daily mass or regular adoration. Next, we turn to what this feast teaches young couples and young adults, especially those with young children. Mary and Joseph brought Jesus to the temple to present him to God and love Moses. Every firstborn child had to be given over to God and placed in the Lord's service. This is to show that every gift comes from God needs to be offered back to him if He wills it for his glory. Every firstborn animal was actually sacrificed in the temple. Firstborn children obviously would never be killed, but a lamb. Or for poor families like the Holy Family, a pair of pigeons or turtle doves would be offered in place of a child. Mary and Joseph, fulfilling perfectly, the law of Moses, came to offer the Son of God in the flesh, back to God the Father, thereby showing that fulfilling the law of the Lord and consecrating our loved ones to Him is a path of life for Christian couples that starts when they bring their newly born child to be baptized. The child is, in a certain sense, sacrificed. The child dies in Christ in the Sacrament of baptism, and Christ rises within to new life. The old Adam with the original sin dies and the new Adam. Christ was full of grace rises and baptism. A child does not merely present it in the temple, but marvelously becomes a temple of the Holy Spirit, spotless and immaculate on the inside, like a tabernacle holding the presence of God within. Parents are called to help their child become aware of this beautiful reality and structure his or her life in accordance with that blessing, helping their son or daughter view his or her life within God's light. Discovering the vocation God is given and saying yes to it. At the end of the Gospel passage, we read that Mary and Joseph, when they had finished everything required by the Mosaic Law, returned to Galilee to their own town of Nazareth, where Jesus grew in wisdom and strength and in the favor of the Lord. Couples are called to take their children with them from the temple back home to their domestic church, and they are help their offspring to grow in wisdom, strength in favor of the law of the Lord, assisting them to live according to their consecration. That's what Mary and Joseph are interceding for all parents to do for their children. Finally, we turn to what all of us can learn from this feast today. Each of us has been presented in the temple by our parents and godparents, and we were consecrated were called to renew that consecration regularly. We're first called to do it in our encounters with God in prayer and the sacrament. When we enter the church, as we dip our fingers into the holy water font, we renew our baptism and the consecration of our lives to God. And we pray the mass we encounter the Lord anew, unite ourselves to Him again and present ourselves together with Him as body and head bride and bridegroom to the father and joint consecration. This Sunday, we give thanks to God for the feast of the presentation. As we come to a culmination so much greater than what Simeon and Anna receive, that day in the temple, Simeon was able to hold Jesus in his arms as he praised God and prophesied that the child was destined to be the ruin and the resurrection of many in Israel, and a sign to be contradicted. Sunday we will have the chance to do far more than hold Jesus in our hands. We'll have a chance to receive Him with him and become one with him in an encounter of loving communion as Jesus seeks to unite us to Him as a sign of contradiction to the ways of the world. He is the glory of Israel and the light of revelation to all peoples. He seeks to make us in communion with him. That light and that glory symbolized by the candles. We were blessed and carried at the beginning of the mass. The mass is the place where Jesus wants to work that transformation, said Mass. He also gives us a foretaste of the Eternal Temple, where we, with Simeon and all the Saints, want one day to behold and encounter him forever. But as asked the Holy Spirit to each of us as He moves Simeon and to come to the temple on Sunday to recognize Jesus, to rejoice in Jesus, to receive Jesus and transformed by Jesus, to leave, to reveal His light and His love to all people. Happy feast to the presentation. God bless you. |
| Ashley | Thank you, Father Roger Landry. Make sure to catch all of his great work at Catholic Preach Income or you can follow his writings at the National Catholic Register. Go to NC, register dotcom. And until next time, we wish you all the very best. And you go with our prayers. |
