Court Watch

Chaos was the law of nature; Order was the dream of man. 

Henry Adams.

A glimpse into what's going on in the law, and the Court's.

April 21, 2025

1.  The U.S. Supreme Court had issued a temporary stay on deportations of Venezuelans to El Salvador under the Enemy Aliens Act, as it well should have.  There isn't a war going on.

The pause is so that it can take the question in chief.

On the same basic topic, a Federal judge has issued a finding of probable cause of criminal contempt for the administration's refusal to adhere to his order regarding such deportations.

2.  Wyoming Tribe's Law Firm One Of The Few Fighting Trump's Big-Law Orders

Trump's ongoing assault on the law includes assaulting law firms that have displeased him. Quite a few have caved in, but this one didn't.

3.  A federal judge ordered that Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk be transferred from a detention center in Louisiana to Vermont no later than at the start of next month.

4.  The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on the Trump administration's plans to end birthright citizenship next month.  Trump, in one of his many stupid statement moments, said that this should be an easy win as birthright citizenship was tied to slavery, which is really ignorant.

5.  Wyoming Supreme Court mulls constitutionality of state’s abortion bans: Much like the case, Wednesday’s hearing largely focused on whether a section of the state’s constitution that protects individuals’ rights to make their own health care decisions prevents the state from banning abortion.

A frustrating thing for conservatives who would like to find a more middle of the road set of people to vote for, now that the Wyoming Republican Party is in a civil war between real conservatives and populists, is that the Democratic Party nationally and locally just can't wash it hands of blood.  

It puts voters in a horrible position.  Insane gerontocracy v. seas of blood.

Former Wyoming Supreme Court Justice Keith Kautz created some controversy when he joined some legislators in a prayer session associated with the oral arguments, stating as a prayer:

I especially pray for the justices on the Wyoming Supreme Court.  May they know that the true beginning of wisdom is to acknowledge you. Give each of them wisdom and courage in deciding the case coming next week. Let them see how much you love each human and the world you created.

I don't see a problem with that, but apparently some people did.  Justice Kautz noted that he asked, upon retiring, not to be assigned to any cases dealing with abortion because of his religion based opposition to it.  He apparently is a member of a Baptist group called "Converge". 

6.  A group of Wyoming lawyers wrote an open letter about recent legal developments.  It was directed at Wyoming's Congressional representation.

Condemn attacks on judiciary, Wyoming lawyers and judges urge delegation

The letter was met with a "pound sand" response from that representation which went on to say that Federal courts had too much jurisdiction, which they are seeking to limit.

That's wrong, and that's a mistake.

William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”

Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”

William Roper: “Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!”

Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!”

Robert Bolt, A Man for All Seasons: A Play in Two Acts

April 24, 2025

Trump has issued an order which takes on accrediting bodies, including the ABA.

REFORMING ACCREDITATION TO STRENGTHEN HIGHER EDUCATION

Executive Orders

April 23, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1.  Purpose.  A group of higher education accreditors are the gatekeepers that decide which colleges and universities American students can spend the more than $100 billion in Federal student loans and Pell Grants dispersed each year.  The accreditors’ job is to determine which institutions provide a quality education — and therefore merit accreditation.  Unfortunately, accreditors have not only failed in this responsibility to students, families, and American taxpayers, but they have also abused their enormous authority.

Accreditors routinely approve institutions that are low-quality by the most important measures.  The national six-year undergraduate graduation rate was an alarming 64 percent in 2020.  Further, many accredited institutions offer undergraduate and graduate programs with a negative return on investment — almost 25 percent of bachelor’s degrees and more than 40 percent of master’s degrees — which may leave students financially worse off and in enormous debt by charging them exorbitant sums for a degree with very modest earnings potential.

Notwithstanding this slide in graduation rates and graduates’ performance in the labor market, the spike in debt obligations in relation to expected earnings, and repayment rates on student loans, accreditors have remained improperly focused on compelling adoption of discriminatory ideology, rather than on student outcomes.  Some accreditors make the adoption of unlawfully discriminatory practices a formal standard of accreditation, and therefore a condition of accessing Federal aid, through “diversity, equity, and inclusion” or “DEI”-based standards of accreditation that require institutions to “share results on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the context of their mission by considering . . . demographics . . . and resource allocation.” Accreditors have also abused their governance standards to intrude on State and local authority.

The American Bar Association’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar (Council), which is the sole federally recognized accreditor for Juris Doctor programs, has required law schools to “demonstrate by concrete action a commitment to diversity and inclusion” including by “commit[ting] to having a student body [and faculty] that is diverse with respect to gender, race, and ethnicity.”  As the Attorney General has concluded and informed the Council, the discriminatory requirement blatantly violates the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023).  Though the Council subsequently suspended its enforcement while it considers proposed revisions, this standard and similar unlawful mandates must be permanently eradicated.

The Liaison Committee on Medical Education, which is the only federally recognized body that accredits Doctor of Medicine degree programs, requires that an institution “engage[] in ongoing, systematic, and focused recruitment and retention activities, to achieve mission-appropriate diversity outcomes among its students.”  The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, which is the sole accreditor for both allopathic and osteopathic medical residency and fellowship programs, similarly “expect[s]” institutions to focus on implementing “policies and procedures related to recruitment and retention of individuals underrepresented in medicine,” including “racial and ethnic minority individuals.”  The standards for training tomorrow’s doctors should focus solely on providing the highest quality care, and certainly not on requiring unlawful discrimination.

American students and taxpayers deserve better, and my Administration will reform our dysfunctional accreditation system so that colleges and universities focus on delivering high-quality academic programs at a reasonable price.  Federal recognition will not be provided to accreditors engaging in unlawful discrimination in violation of Federal law.

Sec. 2.  Holding Accreditors Accountable for Unlawful Actions.  (a)  The Secretary of Education shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, hold accountable, including through denial, monitoring, suspension, or termination of accreditation recognition, accreditors who fail to meet the applicable recognition criteria or otherwise violate Federal law, including by requiring institutions seeking accreditation to engage in unlawful discrimination in accreditation-related activity under the guise of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” initiatives.

(b)  The Attorney General and the Secretary of Education shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, investigate and take appropriate action to terminate unlawful discrimination by American law schools that is advanced by the Council, including unlawful “diversity, equity, and inclusion” requirements under the guise of accreditation standards.  The Secretary of Education shall also assess whether to suspend or terminate the Council’s status as an accrediting agency under Federal law.

(c)  The Attorney General and the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall investigate and take appropriate action to terminate unlawful discrimination by American medical schools or graduate medical education entities that is advanced by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education or the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education or other accreditors of graduate medical education, including unlawful “diversity, equity, and inclusion” requirements under the guise of accreditation standards.  The Secretary of Education shall also assess whether to suspend or terminate the Committee’s or the Accreditation Council’s status as an accrediting agency under Federal law or take other appropriate action to ensure lawful conduct by medical schools, graduate medical education programs, and other entities that receive Federal funding for medical education.

Sec. 3.  New Principles of Student-Oriented Accreditation.  (a)  To realign accreditation with high-quality, valuable education for students, the Secretary of Education shall, consistent with applicable law, take appropriate steps to ensure that:

(i)    accreditation requires higher education institutions to provide high-quality, high-value academic programs free from unlawful discrimination or other violations of Federal law;

(ii)   barriers are reduced that limit institutions from adopting practices that advance credential and degree completion and spur new models of education;

(iii)  accreditation requires that institutions support and appropriately prioritize intellectual diversity amongst faculty in order to advance academic freedom, intellectual inquiry, and student learning;

(iv)   accreditors are not using their role under Federal law to encourage or force institution to violate State laws, unless such State laws violate the Constitution or Federal law; and

(v)    accreditors are prohibited from engaging in practices that result in credential inflation that burdens students with additional unnecessary costs.

(b)  To advance the policies and objectives in subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary of Education shall:

(i)    resume recognizing new accreditors to increase competition and accountability in promoting high-quality, high-value academic programs focused on student outcomes;

(ii)   mandate that accreditors require member institutions to use data on program-level student outcomes to improve such outcomes, without reference to race, ethnicity, or sex;

(iii)  promptly provide to accreditors any noncompliance findings relating to member institutions issued after an investigation conducted by the Office of Civil Rights under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.) or Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.);

(iv)   launch an experimental site, pursuant to section 487A(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1094a(b)), to accelerate innovation and improve accountability by establishing new flexible and streamlined quality assurance pathways for higher education institutions that provide high-quality, high-value academic programs;

(v)    increase the consistency, efficiency, and effectiveness of the accreditor recognition review process, including through the use of technology;

(vi)   streamline the process for higher education institutions to change accreditors to ensure institutions are not forced to comply with standards that are antithetical to institutional values and mission; and

(vii)  update the Accreditation Handbook to ensure that the accreditor recognition and reauthorization process is transparent, efficient, and not unduly burdensome.

Sec. 4.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

                              DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,

April 26, 2025

The Trump administration really took a step towards Nazism with the arrest of Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan for supposedly interfering with immigration laws.

Wyoming’s crossover voting ban and closed primary elections are being challenged in a newly filed civil action.

This should be really interesting.

Virginia Giuffre, who accused Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein of sexual abuse, has died by suicide at age 41.  Prince Andrew's fall is directly tied to her, and there's no doubt that they met when she was just 17 years old, although he denied any improper conduct with her.

She was a married woman with three children, and had relocated to Australia. Apparently she and her husband had recently separated, and she had recently been in an automobile accident.

The topic of releasing the Epstein files has come up, but so far the Trump administration has failed to release them.  Trump, of course, knew Epstein.

April 29, 2025

Hageman, Barrasso Say Judges Who Shield Illegal Immigrants Should Be Arrested

President Donald Trump’s administration did not go too far in arresting judges for allegedly shielding illegal immigrants from federal agents, say members of Wyoming’s congressional delegation.

April 30, 2025

Judge: Rock Springs school didn’t violate parental rights in transgender pronoun case: School district officials, educators did not keep information from high schooler’s parents or violate mother’s religious rights, federal judge concludes.

May 2, 2025

A federal judge in Texas barred the Trump administration from deporting Venezuelans from South Texas under the Enemy Aliens Act.

May 3, 2025

I missed it, as I was busy, but Law Day, which is May 1, was rebranded by Trump as Loyalty Day.

The meanings aren't even remotely close.

A Federal Court blocked the Trump administration sanctions on a U.S. law firm.

The Wyoming Legislature’s 2025 general session has ended

The Wyoming Legislature’s 2025 general session has ended: Lawmakers adjourned Thursday.

Wyo File.

Thank goodness.

Now it's a matter of seeing what remaining bills are signed by Governor Gordon, or allowed into law without his signature, or veteod.

Probably the least impressive legislature since the Johnson County War.  Still, a lot of the really bad legislation died.

Joan Barron: Maybe Next Year Will Be Better

March 13, 2025

Gordon Vetoes Attempt To Defund His Energy Project Program

March 17, 2025

Governor vetoes Wyoming lawmakers’ bill declaring abortion is not health care: Mark Gordon's decision comes as Wyoming Supreme Court prepares to hear challenge to two 2023 abortion bans.

March 19, 2025

Governor Gordon Defends Law Enforcement in Veto of Problematic Second Amendment Bill 

Governor signs bills banning sanctuary cities and ranked-choice voting 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. – In a public ceremony that included members of state, county, and municipal law enforcement, the Governor signed a letter vetoing Senate File 196 - Second Amendment Protection Act - amendments, calling the bill “overkill” that would punish first responders and threaten the cooperative work between Wyoming law enforcement officers and their federal partners.

“This Act takes aim at – and potentially vilifies – law enforcement if, in the process of working to apprehend, prosecute, and detain illegal aliens, drug mules, human traffickers, abusers, and other miscreants, they cooperate with the federal government and a gun is involved. Wyoming can do better,” the Governor wrote. 

Governor Gordon also signed nine bills today, including legislation banning sanctuary cities in Wyoming, prohibiting the use of private funds for elections, and a prohibition on ranked-choice voting.

The Governor also exercised his line-item veto authority on Senate File 169 - Strategic investments and projects account-repeal. The Governor left in place $10 million for the siting, design, construction, and operation of a new State Shooting Complex. However, he questioned the inclusion of the shooting complex by usurping the supplemental budget process, while the Legislature chose not to fund other capital construction projects, including a new veterans home.  

In his letter vetoing Sections 1, 2, and 3 of SF 169, the Governor says he has always supported simplicity in budgeting, but the repeal of the Strategic investments and projects (SIPA) account removes the ability of the Governor to use investment income that should be available to any Governor in recommending a budget.

“The effort seems counterintuitive and parochial, serving only the narrow focus of withholding revenue from the Executive Branch budgeting process while preserving it exclusively for the legislature’s priorities,” Governor Gordon wrote. “Wyoming is required to balance its budget with expenditures not exceeding income. That effort has always been a joint effort. Artificially constraining income to one branch breaks with that practice and will not necessarily result in a cleaner or a leaner budget.”

The Governor also vetoed Section 4 in the Act, which would have terminated the Wyoming State Penitentiary Account (WSPA), a subaccount of the SIPA. The preservation of the account will enable the Department of Corrections to fund integrated security improvements. 

The Governor signed the following bills today:

 

Enrolled Act Bill # Bill Title

 

HEA0062 HB0318 Maintenance of voter lists.

HEA0065 HB0228 Prohibition on private funds for conducting elections.

HEA0071 HB0165 Ranked choice voting-prohibition.

HEA0076 HB0133 Sanctuary cities, counties and state-prohibition.

SEA0073 SF0174 Constitutional apportionment of legislators.

SEA0074 SF0166 Political party formation-amendments.

SEA0077 SF0057 911 service reporting.

SEA0081 SF0032 Unpaved roads speed limits-amendments.

SEA0090 SF0160 Treatment courts-amendments-2.

 

The Governor vetoed the following bill. Click on the bill for the Governor’s letter:

 

SEA0082 SF0196 Second Amendment Protection Act-amendments.

 

The Governor exercised his line-item veto authority on the following bill. Click on the bill for the Governor’s letter. 

 

SEA0098 SF0169 Strategic investments and projects account-repeal.

 

The full text of all bills can be found on the Wyoming Legislature’s website. A list of bills the Governor has taken action on during the 2025 Legislative Session can be found on the Governor's website.

Banning ranked choice voting, done by this bill, really sucks and is anti democratic:

ORIGINAL House 

Bill No. HB0165

 

ENROLLED ACT NO. 71, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 

SIXTY-EIGHTH LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WYOMING

2025 General Session

 

 

 

 

AN ACT relating to elections; clarifying that elections shall not be conducted by ranked choice voting; clarifying that ballots are required to specify only one (1) vote per office to be filled; and providing for an effective date.

 

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

 

Section 1.  W.S. 22‑2‑117(a) and 22‑6‑120(a)(xii) are amended to read:

 

22‑2‑117.  Vote required for election; ratification.

 

(a)  Partisan and nonpartisan candidates who receive the largest number of votes for each office to be filled at the general election are elected. Nothing in this election code shall be deemed to authorize any election in Wyoming to be conducted through ranked choice voting. Any existing or future ordinance enacted or adopted by a county, municipality or any other governmental entity that purports to authorize ranked choice voting in violation of this subsection is void. As used in this subsection, "ranked choice voting" means a voting method that allows voters to rank candidates for an office in order of preference and has ballots cast to be tabulated in multiple rounds following the elimination of a candidate until the candidate or candidates with the most votes are declared winners, or any other system that allows a voter to vote for more than the number of candidates permitted to fill a particular office.

 

22‑6‑120.  Format of general election ballot.

 

(a)  The general election ballot shall be printed in substantial compliance with this format:

 

(xii)  Adjacent to the description of any office shall be printed "Vote for one" or if the office is to be filled by more than one (1) candidate shall be printed "Vote For Not More Than", then the appropriate words and figures designating the proper number to be elected;

 

Section 2.  This act is effective July 1, 2025.

 

(END)

 

March 23, 2025

Forum shopping effort fails, as is obvious that it would:

Judge dismisses suit against Wyoming’s new anti-abortion laws: In Teton County, Judge Owens rules that the attempt to challenge two new laws properly belongs in Natrona County, site of the affected Wellspring clinic.

Making Wyoming's voting process more cumbersome to address a non existent problem here:

Governor allows proof of voter residency, citizenship requirement to become law without signature: Mark Gordon questioned the legality of the bill’s 30-day durational residency requirement.

March 25, 2025

With final bills signed and vetoed, the Legislature switches focus to the ‘off season’

And with this, we conclude the threads on the 2025 Wyoming Legislative Session.

Last edition:

The 2025 Wyoming Legislative Session. Week 7. Vetoes.

Labels: 2020s, 2025, 2025 Wyoming Legislative Session, law

J. D. Vance at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast.

Vance, on the same day he assisted in berating President Zelenskiy.

James Donald Bowman of Middleton Ohio is sort of a hard guy to figure out.  Bowman, and that's his real name, or rather the one he held at birth, grew up in a suburb of Cincinnati, not exactly part of Appalachia.  His parents divorced when he was very young, and when he was six, his mother married for the third time, and his name was changed to James David Hamel.  That's the name he served in the Marine Corps under, and went to university under.  He didn't become "J. D. Vance" until he was ready to graduate from Yale Law school.  Vance was the last name of his maternal grandmother.

Vance has also changed religions over the course of his lifetime.  As a proper Hillbilly would, he was once a member of an Evangelical faith, that of his fathers.  By the time he was out in the world, however, he was an atheist.  He became Catholic through the influence of a Yale law school friend, and became a very traditionalist Catholic at that.

I don't fault him the change in religions (I do the adult change of names, which I regard as phony).  I am, of course, a Catholic, and I therefore welcome those into the faith.  Moreover, I often find that converts are more devout than than "cradle Catholics", who often don't know their own faith all that well, although that's certainly not universal.  And I admire traditionalist Catholics as well.

But here's where I begin to have a problem with Vance.  Just as I don't admire Catholics who become another religion for convenience, something we've always experienced (it often used to be for economic reasons, but now is usually due to divorce and remarriage), I don't admire jettonsing of elements of the faith when it becomes difficult, and Vance has done just that.  Catholics believe that life begins at conception, and that conception should always be via natural means.  Vance has changed his position on abortion to tolerate it where states provide it should be, and he's okay with IVF ,which Catholics definitely are not.

Having said that, on basic moral principals, Vance was closer to the faith than many Catholic politicians have been since 1960.

But now he's an active Vice President, and things are beginning to shift again.  He attempted to strain Catholic social teaching the other day to suggest that Catholics have a diehard family first position in regard to loving our neighbor, and got immediately rebuked.  

Vance is actually the highest elected official in the United States right now, given that Donald Trump cannot Constitutionally occupy the position he pretends to without a Congressional dispensation he has not received.  He's a convert to Catholicism, but occupies an odd status in that he's an intellectual conservative traditionalist convert, but with a wife who is a Hindu and who hasn't followed him there (my Protestant wife hasn't followed me either) and who has heavily compromised himself on certain principal Catholic moral teachings in his recent campaign.

So he makes for an interesting, if predictable, speaker at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast, something that I frankly didn't know even existed.

His speech, and some comments.

I came here last year as a very young senator not knowing how much my life would change, and I'm thankful to God — but also thankful to the friendship of the people in this room for helping us get there, because I think that we have turned a new page in Washington, D.C., and we are going to take advantage of the opportunity that God has given us. 

We? 

So I want to say a couple of words just about Trump administration policy because, while you're certainly not always going to agree with everything that we do in President Trump's administration, I feel very confident in saying that between protecting the rights of pro-life protesters, between ensuring that we have an opportunity to protect the rights of the unborn in the first place, and importantly, protecting the religious liberty of all people — but in particular, Catholics — I think that we can say that President Trump, though not a Catholic himself, has been an incredibly good president for Catholics in the United States of America.

Now we know of course the last administration liked to throw people in jail for silently praying outside of pro-life clinics. We know that they liked to harass pro-life fathers of seven, very often, Catholic fathers, for participating in the pro-life movement. And we know that the last administration wanted to protect taxpayer-funded abortion right up unto the moment of birth. 

The Biden Administration was extremely hostile to pro life positions, and tacked to the extreme left on social issues in general.  Whomever allowed Biden to take these turns, and I suspect it wasn't Biden's idea, should be severely dope slapped.  In large measure, it's such things that gave us King Donald. 

On every single one of those issues, in 30 short days, Donald J. Trump has gone in the exact opposite direction and I am thankful for that. And I'm sure that every single person in this room is thankful for that as well. But I actually want to talk about a couple of other things in particular. 

One of the most important parts of President Trump's policy, and where I think President Trump's policy is most in accord with Christian social teaching and with the Catholic faith, is that more than any president of my lifetime, President Trump has pursued a path of peace. And we very often, I think, ignore the way in which our foreign policy is either an instrument or an impediment to people all over the world being able to practice their faith. And we know — and as, of course, I learned in this breakfast last year — I believe there were some Nigerian priests who were being persecuted, and were trying to protect their flock despite incredible persecution. 

Trump has followed a path of being a bully, trying to extort the mineral wealth of another country, while making it compromise with an invader.

There will always be wars and rumors of war.  Ukraine is justly defending itself. Catholics are not pacifists. 

We know that some of the biggest groups that are persecuted all over the world today are Christians and the Trump administration promises you that whether it's here at home with our own citizens or all over the world, we will be the biggest defenders of religious liberty and the rights of conscience. And I think those policies will fall to the benefit of Catholics in particular all over the world.

But I would say, my friends, that it's not enough simply to protect the rights of conscience, to pursue funding opportunities and grant-making opportunities that protect the rights of people to engage in religious conscience. We also have to remember that oftentimes the biggest impediments to religious liberty have not come through malice from the United States government but have actually come through carelessness. And one of the things that — I have to be honest — that I am most ashamed about, is that in the United States of America, sometimes it is our foreign misadventures that lead to the eradication of historical Christian communities all over the world. 

And so when President Trump talks about the need to bring peace whether it's in Russia and Ukraine, whether it's in the Middle East, we of course have to recognize that, as a policy oriented towards saving lives, and carrying out one of Christ's most important commandments, but I think we also must recognize it as an effort to protect the religious liberty of Christians. Because over the past 40 years, it has often been historical Christian communities who bear the brunt of failed American foreign policy and that is, in my view, perhaps the most important way in which Donald Trump has been a defender of Christian rights all over the world. He has a foreign policy that is oriented towards peace. 

Trump's peace policy in the Middle East involves siding with one group of people in their entirety while thinking, as his tiny brain does, that the others can happily simply be moved to a second rate Middle Eastern version of a Florida housing development. 

We have done it already so much in the past 30 days, and I'm proud that we will work for peace all over the world in the remaining four years of President Trump's term, and I think that's an important thing.

Now of course, we're not always going to agree, and I'm sure that there are people in this room who agree or disagree with some of our views on foreign policy on any number of issues. The one thing that I will promise you is that you're always going to have an open door with me and with the president. I think that you've already seen that, and if you haven't, please come and bring your concerns — and some of you have already brought many concerns to me over the last 30 days — but also your “attaboys,” because I think that part of being a good presidential administration for people of faith all over the United States, part of it is listening to people of faith when they have concerns.

And I think that it's important — and I'll make this commitment to you in front of God, and in front of all those television cameras back there — that we will always listen to people of faith and people of conscience in the United States of America. You have an open door to the Trump administration even if, and especially maybe when, you disagree with us. So please use that opportunity: communicate with us when we get things right but also when we get things wrong. And that is my solemn obligation but also my request because, of course, as I've learned during the campaign — of course, I've got Secret Service protection and it's bumped up now that I'm the vice president of the United States — I live in a bubble, ladies and gentlemen, I live in a roaming bubble and wherever I go, I'm surrounded by armed agents. The only way to keep me honest, and the only way to know what is actually affecting the real lives of people all over our country, is for you to talk to us. So please, consider that open door very much an invitation, but also a request.

And I will say that I believe that I'm the first Catholic convert to ever be vice president of the United States, [applause] — I appreciate you guys clapping because, it turns out, there are some people on the internet who don't like Catholic converts. And in fact, there are some Catholics who appear not to like Catholic converts. I've learned that the hard way. But of course, the gross majority of of my brothers and sisters in Christ have been incredibly welcoming and Incredibly charitable and for that I'm grateful.

Vance's comments about converts and the Internet here are quite valid.  Vance has proven to be polarizing, including amongst Catholics, which has lead to Twitter wars of a very unfortunate nature.  As noted, converts are often amongst the most devout Catholics. 

I wanted to just reflect on that, on being a Catholic and particularly a Catholic convert in public life, in the hopes that maybe it would provide some wisdom or some guidance, or maybe just some interesting stories for those of you who are enjoying your breakfast. And you know, one of the things that I try to remind myself of as a convert, is that there's a lot I don't know. When I was a kid, we used to call new converts to the faith “baby Christians” and I recognize very much that I am a “baby Catholic” — that there are things about the faith that I don't know. So I try to be humble as best I can when I talk about the faith and publicly, because of course, I'm not always going to get it right. And I don't want my inadequacies in describing our faith to fall back on the faith itself. And so if you ever hear me pontificating about the Catholic faith, please recognize it comes from a place of deep belief, but it also comes from a place of not always knowing everything all the time.

And you know, now I say that of course, I don't try to comment on every single Catholic issue. I try not to get involved in the civil wars between Dominicans and Jesuits and conservative Catholics and progressive Catholics. But as Michael Corleone said in The Godfather, “Sometimes they pull me back in.” Sometimes I can't help — I can't help but spout off. I am a politician after all, ladies and gentlemen. 

But the thing that I have tried to remind people of, and the thing that I try to remind myself of, is that what attracted me to the Christian faith, and what attracted me to this Church in particular, is the recognition that grace is not something that happens instantaneously. It's something that God works in us over a long period of time — sometimes many years, and sometimes many decades. I think that when I I was a kid, my assumption was that grace is something where the Holy Spirit would come in and it would solve all of our problems.

I learned the hard way, as a Catholic — in part, by following the sacramental life as best as I could — that grace is very much a process that God works in us over time. He makes us closer to him and makes us better people in the process. And so when I first became a Catholic, I would probably go to confession every other week because I would fail to go to Mass every other week. Things would come up, you'd have business trips you'd have — the kids would get sick — and I just remember that this process of thinking: okay, if I don't go to church this week I'm going to have to go and talk to some stranger about everything that I did bad the last two weeks, and that process worked in me a much better discipline, a much better prayerful life. And you know I'm batting probably like 95% of Sundays now that I actually go to Mass. This is, I think, one of the geniuses of our faith — that it teaches us through repetition in some ways, and it forms us through a process, of course, that is I think at the heart of the mystery of faith, that somehow by practicing the sacraments — even imperfectly, as I certainly do — God transforms us. 

And while I am as imperfect a Christian as any person in this room, I really do feel that God is transforming me every single day, and that's one of the great blessings of our faith, and one of the great blessings of following the sacraments as I try to do. So thank you all for welcoming a convert into your ranks, because I certainly benefit from it — and my family does too.

The second thing that I take from my Catholic faith is a recognition that the deepest and most important things are not material. They're not GDP. They're not the numbers that we see in the stock market. The real measure of health in a society is the safety and stability and the health of our families, and of our people. We are in the business, in President Trump's administration, of producing prosperity, but that prosperity is a means to an end. And that end is the flourishing, hopefully, of the life of every single citizen in the United States of America. 

Trump, his supposed boss, does believe that the only thing that matters in the world is wealth, and therefore is an extreme materialist.  He's put part of the government in the hands of a materialist atheist.

That's why we care about these things. I often remind myself that there have been times in the past where you know the GDP numbers were maybe moving in the right direction, where the stock market was moving in the right direction, but the United States of America was losing life expectancy. I think that what the Catholic Church calls me to do is to say that if the stock market's doing okay, but people are literally dying and losing years off of their life, then we have to do better as a country. 

We do, which raises the question of why we'd wipe out USAID, which was a lifeline for many people around the world. 

Catholicism — Christianity at its root, I think — teaches our public officials to care about the deep things, the important things, the protection of the unborn, the flourishing of our children, and the health and the sanctity of our marriages. And yes, we care about prosperity but we care about prosperity so that we can promote the common good of every citizen in the United States of America. 

And when I think about the deep things, the things that really matter there was something really amazing that happened to me in November of 2024. All my friends were there, all my family was there. We were gathered together in a great moment of celebration and, of course, I'm talking about when my 7-year-old chose to be baptized into the Christian faith. And he's at school right now, so he won't see this, but as amazing as it was to win the election of course in November of 2024, and as amazing as it was to know that President Trump would become president again and would get to accomplish so many good things for the American people, the thing that I was most excited about in November of 2024 is that the week after we won the election my son chose to be baptized in the Christian faith. 

Now here's the basic idea, and and for those of you, of course — you all mostly are cradle Catholics, I assume —  typically we do water baptism of infants in the Catholic Church very very early on. But as many of you know, I am part of an interfaith marriage. My wife, though she comes to church with us almost every single Sunday, she is not Catholic herself. And so the bargain that we have struck is that we will raise our kids Catholic, but we will let them choose the moment that they want to ultimately become baptized. And if that's terrible sacrilege, blame the Dominicans, because they're the ones who came up with this scheme. 

But my 7-year-old elected to become baptized and it was the proudest moment maybe that I've ever had as a father, and he took it very seriously and he wanted to know what are the right things to say: 'Dad what do I need to do? What does this mean? Why is this important?' 

And it was an amazing thing for me to see :my 7-year-old working through these things himself and when I talk about the deep things, the important things, that's what I I'm talking about. Of course we care about our economic indicators and of course we care about the wages of our citizens. We care about those things because when our people are doing better they can have the kinds of moments that promote the kind of flourishing that all of us believe is the very core of a good human life and that of course, in my case, was watching my little 7-year-old son become baptized.

And so while, again, I will never be perfect, I will always try to remind myself that the goal of our public policy is to promote the common good and I will fight for that every single day that I am a public official. 

And that brings me to the final observation I'd like to make as a Christian, a Catholic convert in public life, is that you know, sometimes the bishops don't like what I say and I'm sure, by the way, sometimes they're right and sometimes they're wrong. My goal is not to litigate when I'm right and when they're wrong or vice versa. My goal is to maybe articulate the way that I think about being a Christian in public life.

When you also have religious leaders in public life who have a spiritual duty to speak on the issues of the day and the way that I try to think about it is, the Catholic church is a kind of technology. It's a technology that was developed 2,000 years ago and it's coming into contact with a technology that's about 10 years old, 20 years old — and that's, of course, social media.

What I I try to remind myself of, is that the clergy are important spiritual leaders. You'll sometimes hear people say, ‘Well we'll let, you know, the clergy talk about matters of the Church, but we can ignore them when it comes to matters of public policy.’ I think that's the wrong way to look at it. That's certainly not the right way to look at it for me. But what I try to remind myself of is that we are not called as Christians to obsess over every social media controversy that implicates the Catholic Church, whether it involves a clergy or a bishop or the Holy Father himself. 

I think that we could frankly take a page out of the books of our grandparents who respected our clergy, who looked to them for guidance, but didn't obsess and fight over every single word that came out of their mouth and entered social media. I don't think that's good and I'm not again counseling all of you but I don't think it's good for us as Christians to constantly fight with one another over every single controversy in the Church. Sometimes we should let this stuff play out a little bit and try to live our faith as best we can under the dictates of our faith and under the dictates of our spiritual leaders, but not hold them to the standards of social media influencers because they're not. 

That brings me of course to the last point that I want to make which is that, as you've probably seen publicly, the Holy Father, Pope Francis, has criticized some of our policies when it comes to immigration. Again, my goal here is not to litigate with him or any other clergy member about who is right and who is wrong. You obviously know my views and I will speak to them consistently because I think that I have to do it because it serves the best interest of the American people. 

I hate the casual use of the world "litigate", but frankly it's one of Vance's favorite. 

What I want to do instead is remind, and I talk to a lot of conservative Catholics and I talked to progressive Catholics too, and I think that sometimes a lot of conservative Catholics are too preoccupied with their political criticisms of a particular clergy member or the leader of the Catholic Church. And of course, I'm not telling you that you're wrong because sometimes I even agree with you. I think that what I would say is that it's not in the best interest of any of us, again, to treat the religious leaders of our faith as just another social media influencer, and I think frankly that goes in both ways if I can be so bold. 

I think it's incumbent upon our religious leaders to recognize that in the era of social media, people will hang on every single word that they utter even if that wasn't their intention and even if a given declaration wasn't meant for consumption in the social media age, but every day since I heard of Pope Francis' illness, I say a prayer for the Holy Father because while yes, I was certainly surprised when he criticized our immigration policy in the way that he has, I I believe that the Pope is fundamentally a person who cares about the flock of Christians under his leadership. And he's a man who cares about the spiritual direction of the faith.  

I say this because every day me and my children have said a prayer for the Holy Father and we pray for his health and we pray for his comfort as he deals with what appears to be a a pretty serious health crisis. 

And while, yes, some of our media and some of our social media influencers and even some of us fellow Catholics I think, try to bring the Holy Father into every culture-war battle in American politics, I will always remember the Holy Father — whether he makes his way through this illness, and I certainly hope that he does — I will always remember the Holy Father in March of 2020 at a time of incredible stress for really the entire world, remember that was the height of the COVID pandemic. None of us knew how bad it was. We heard reports from Italy of people dying en masse on ventilators and personally, I had just a few weeks earlier welcomed our second child into the world and so when the pandemic happened, I had a 3-week old baby at home and I went to Dick’s Sporting Goods and I bought 900 rounds of ammunition and then I went to Walmart and I bought two bags of rice and I sat at home with my bags of rice and my  900 rounds of ammunition and said, “All right, we're just going to wait this thing out,” and into that void when a lot of people didn't know how bad it was, and of course, thankfully the pandemic was not as bad as the very worst predictions. It was quite bad, but not as bad as the very worst predictions.

Ugh, the AR15 Effect and the Stalingrad Weltanschauung making an appearance. 

I think all of us can remember that moment of the Holy Father standing in an empty St Peter's Square holding the Eucharist above his head and giving a sermon that I returned to consistently because it was incredibly meaningful to me at the time and it remains meaningful today — and so if you'll forgive me, I hope that you'll be okay with me reading just an excerpt of the homily that Pope Francis gave:

‘When evening had come’ (Mark 4:35). The Gospel passage we have just heard begins like this. For weeks now it has been evening. Thick darkness has gathered over our squares, our streets and our cities; it has taken over our lives, filling everything with a deafening silence and a distressing void, that stops everything as it passes by; we feel it in the air, we notice in people’s gestures, their glances give them away. We find ourselves afraid and lost. Like the disciples in the Gospel we were caught off guard by an unexpected, turbulent storm. We have realized that we are on the same boat, all of us fragile and disoriented, but at the same time important and needed, all of us called to row together, each of us in need of comforting the other. On this boat … are all of us. Just like those disciples, who spoke anxiously with one voice, saying ‘We are perishing,’ so we too have realized that we cannot go on thinking of ourselves, but only together can we do this.

It is easy to recognize ourselves in this story. What is harder to understand is Jesus’ attitude. While his disciples are quite naturally alarmed and desperate, he is in the stern, in the part of the boat that sinks first. And what does he do? In spite of the tempest, he sleeps on soundly, trusting in the Father; this is the only time in the Gospels we see Jesus sleeping. When he wakes up, after calming the wind and the waters, he turns to the disciples in a reproaching voice: ‘Why are you afraid? Have you no faith?’

Let us try to understand. In what does the lack of the disciples’ faith consist, as contrasted with Jesus’ trust? They had not stopped believing in him; in fact, they called on him. But we see how they call on him: “Teacher, do you not care if we perish?” Do you not care: they think that Jesus is not interested in them, does not care about them. One of the things that hurts us and our families most when we hear it said is: ‘Do you not care about me?’ It is a phrase that wounds and unleashes storms in our hearts. It would have shaken Jesus too. Because he, more than anyone, cares about us. Indeed, once they have called on him, he saves his disciples from their discouragement.

The storm exposes our vulnerability and uncovers those false and superfluous certainties around which we have constructed our daily schedules, our projects, our habits and priorities. It shows us how we have allowed to become dull and feeble the very things that nourish, sustain and strengthen our lives and our communities. The tempest lays bare all our prepackaged ideas and forgetfulness of what nourishes our people’s souls; all those attempts that anesthetize us with ways of thinking and acting that supposedly ‘save’ us, but instead prove incapable of putting us in touch with our roots and keeping alive the memory of those who have gone before us. We deprive ourselves of the antibodies we need to confront adversity.

And that is how I will always remember the Holy Father: as a great pastor. As a man who can speak the truth of the faith in a very profound way at a moment of great crisis. And so I would ask all of us, if you would join me, in this prayer for Pope Francis:

In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Almighty and generous God, we thank you for your charity. Please grant your mercy upon Pope Francis so he may be restored from sickness and guide us in watchful care. We pray that you bless our Holy Father's doctors, nurses and medical staff with wisdom and capability so that you may work through them to renew the health of your shepherd through Christ Our Lord. Amen.

As I conclude my remarks here: I'm not ever going to be perfect. I'm never going to get everything right. But what I will try to do is to try to be the kind of leader who helps our shared civilization build those true antibodies against adversity. And if the Holy Father can hear us, I hope he knows that there are thousands of faithful Catholics in this room and millions of faithful Catholics in this country who are praying for him as he weathers his particular storm.

God bless you. 

Thank you.

Well, could be a lot worse.

I worry, however, that the Trump administration is going to result in a lot of harm to Christians in general, and Catholics specifically.  Trump was raised as as Calvinist and both he and Musk act like them.  Trump isn't close to Catholicism, he's close, for political purposes, to the New  Apostolic Reformation Evangelical Christians who believe that the United States has a militant Protestant purpose. Catholic itself is a barely evolved Latin word, Catholicus, meaning universal.  We have a universal world outlook, which the Trump administration seems to completely lack.  When Trump's policies all fall apart, and they're already starting to, those on the outside will cast a negative eye towards "Christians", not realizing that much of what we're seeing has very little to do with "one, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church", and that we mean those words.

The last Catholic President, Joe Biden, didn't do Catholicism any big favors.  The prior one, John F. Kennedy, didn't either.  Let us hope and pray that J. D. Vance as Vice President, and probable President soon, won't walk that well worn path.

On being duped, and staying duped. I saw some Trumpsplainers go berserk on Twitter on the question of betraying Ukraine, with . . .

well at least he isn't having kids get gender bending surgery.

Oh?

Has Trump done anything on that topic?

Well, no.  He hasn't.

He did ban biological men from participating in women's sports, something states were doing anyhow, and which is widely supported.  And his Secretary of Defense banned those who had received such surgeries from joining the service (not from staying in).

And on the social issues, somethings to consider.

Has he done anything to widen prohibitions against abortion?

Nope.  In fact, to the contrary, he's supporting IVF which results in millions of abortions and which is condemned by the Apostolic Faiths, including the one J. D. Vance claims to adhere to.

Has he done anything to protect the traditional definition of marriage?

Nope.  Indeed, his Treasury Secretary is openly homosexual.  I'm not saying he shouldn't be Treasury Secretary, but the populist had a four year fit over Biden's Transpiration Secretary being in the exact same domestic situation.

Exact same.  

I guess its okay now.

Deportation of illegal aliens?

Well, it's at pretty much the same rate it was under Biden.

So, those who supported Trump as they wanted to advance social issues on the right, well, what did you get?

Anything?

Just men out of women's sports, which was being done anyhow.

Piles of cost saving cuts of wasteful things?

Nope, a few cuts of wasteful things combined with cuts we'll soon have to make up, supported by lies (like 150 year olds getting Social Security, not happening).

Indeed, this one is amusing as the most famous "discoveries" of the week is that Musk's minors in charge aren't familiar with COBAL, which is before their time.  They read COBAL entries literally when in fact they're a code, so they thing they think were literally years, weren't.

That's known now, but will they admit it?  Nope.

Oh, and the end of DEI, which wasn't really impacting you much anyhow, was it?

And all in exchange for a government dominated by oligarchs, being hated globally, and losing protections long won.

You were duped. 

But you won't admit it.

Friday, January 17, 1975. Chinese political turnover, French infanticide.

Zhou Enlai (周恩来) was re-elected as Prime Minister of the People's Republic of China. Deng Xiaoping (邓小平) was elected as a Vice-Premier and Vice-Chairman of the party, ending an eight year period of political exile. 

France legalized infanticide during the first ten weeks of pregnancy. 

Last edition:

Wednesday, January 15, 1975. Independence for Angola.

Labels: 1970s, 1975, Angola, Colonialism, Portugal, Portuguese Empire

The Law of Unintended Consequences visits Wyoming.

When the Affordable Healthcare Act, commonly known as "Obamacare" was passed the then right wing of the Republican Party mounted a scare campaign that there would be "death panels" for healthcare.

Now, of course, the public is acclimated to the bill and the Republicans won't touch it.

Anyhow, the Wyoming legislature of the period passed a bill sponsored by an extremely conservative legislator  to amend the constitution to add this text:

Wyoming Constitution Art. 1, § 38. Right of health care access

(a) Each competent adult shall have the right to make his or her own health care decisions. The parent, guardian or legal representative of any other natural person shall have the right to make health care decisions for that person.

(b) Any person may pay, and a health care provider may accept, direct payment for health care without imposition of penalties or fines for doing so.

(c) The legislature may determine reasonable and necessary restrictions on the rights granted under this section to protect the health and general welfare of the people or to accomplish the other purposes set forth in the Wyoming Constitution.

(d) The state of Wyoming shall act to preserve these rights from undue governmental infringement.

While it took her seemingly forever to do it, a district court judge in Teton County has ruled that Wyoming's recent ban on abortion violated this provision as abortion is "health care".

I'll be frank.  I'm abhorred by abortion and its not health care.  It's infanticide.  But this gives us an example of the costs of paranoia.  The amendment to the constitution was unnecessary.  Completely unnecessary.  And now its come back to defeat an issue that was a greater one to its sponsors.

Indeed, the sponsor of the amendment was quoted awhile back to the effect that he'd be horrified if his bill resulted in ongoing abortions.  Well, it did. He should be horrified.

Now this goes on to the Wyoming Supreme Court where I'll guess it will be upheld.   There will be an effort to repeal the amendment, but my guess is that it might very well fail.  Legislators will attempt to draft bills around the decision, but they'll fail as well.

Blog Mirror: Late-term abortions are not a myth. They’re happening.

 

Late-term abortions are not a myth. They’re happening.

The Christian, and more particularly the Catholic, vote. 2024

I recently noted, after the second assassination attempt on Donald Trump, a group of folks I know posting prayers for Donald Trump.  

I've noted this before.

In this instance, I post the example below.

Now, let me start off by noting, that  praying for anyone, particularly those in some kind of danger, distress, or bad situation, is a Christian thing to do, and should be done.   That's not the point here.

What is, is the adoption by some Christians, and more particularly by some Catholics, of the concept of Trump as a Christian warrior, is badly misbegotten.  The "Cause his enemies to stumble and fall into confusion and panic" line is particularly worrisome.  Indeed, if he were granted "clarity", it seems to me that he'd have to spend darned near all of his remaining days on Earth in reparative acts of repentance.

There's not an observant Christian in this race.

Indeed, while praying for Trump should be done, and for Kamala Harris as well, the real question in this race, if you are an observant Christian, is not necessarily which of these two candidates should you vote for, but rather should you vote for somebody else.

I'd suggest that at least if you live in a state which is going to go for Trump, or going to go for Harris, you must in fact vote for a third party.  

Lets start with the situation I find myself in.  What if you are an observant Christian, or more particularly a Catholic, and live in a state Donald Trump is going to win.  As an observant Christian, you should not vote for Donald Trump.

First of all, there's no real reason to believe that Trump himself, in spite of some, particularly Evangelicals, claiming him as a Christian, is a Christian.  He's a nominal Presbyterian, we know, but if he actually believes any Presbyterian doctrine, he must be an extreme Calvinist that believes in predestination as he apparently feels he can do whatever he wants and it doesn't really matter.

Personally, he's a serious polygamist who has not only repeatedly married, divorced, and remarried, but he's had at least two well known affairs while married.¹   His conduct towards women in general is abhorrent.

He's also a constant liar, with serious lies being a grave sin.  He tried to steal the 2020 election, which is obviously a grave sin.

Among the horrific lies he's spread are ones about immigrants.  And he's threatening to deport millions of people who are, granted, illegal aliens, but who now live in the country, with some having done so for a very long time.

What some will say, is that Christians have to vote for him, as he stands opposed to the moral decay that's brought about such things as transgenderism, and he stands against the sea of blood that the Democrats would unleash in regard to abortion.  Both of those are valid point, although on abortion he's modified his position to one that resembles that of a lot of Democrats.

Then there's Kamala Harris.

Harris is a Baptist, but hardly reflects the traditional religious positions of the Anabaptist Protestant faith.  She isn't a serial polygamist, to be sure, but her spouse had a prior marriage, which is problematic in Christian theology.  Setting that aside, as it's become so common amongst Christians, and as it is ignored by most of Protestantism, its her views on other things that make her a no go for Christians.

She's in favor of the current Democratic platform that fully endorses the horror of Roe v. Wade, which she'd see enshrined as law.  The current GOP platform is silent on abortion, as an act of cowardice, but the Democrats are all in on it.

The Democrats are also all in on transgenderism, something for which there's no evidence as being grounded in nature, and may well be grounded in mental illness.   And while confusing the boundaries between natural marriage and genders has not been a big issue in this campaign, it's clear where the Democrats are on that as well.

For those reason, an observant Christian cannot vote for her.

But you don't need to.

At least you don't need to, as noted, if you live in a state that's going hard for Trump, or hard for Harris.

The only political party that really squares with Christianity is the American Solidarity Party.  If you've heard the Four Things homily I noted the other day, it's the only party you could be a member of and not be squirming in your seats.

It's the only really moral choice in this election, and if you live in a state that's going hard for Harris or Trump, I'd argue its the choice you have to make. In those states you don't have a "lesser of two evils" choice, but rather a protest against evil requirement.  Voting for Trump or Harris in a state that's going  hard for one or the other endorses their platform, and serves to only do that.

It also serves to reinforce the insane two party system that is not serving the country, at all and needs to end.  It's time to end it.  Voting for a third party starts that process.

Footnotes:

1. Recently I've seen it noted that Melania Trump is the first "Catholic first lady since Jackie Kennedy".

Yeah, well not a very observant Catholic.  In the eyes of the Church she's in an invalid marriage for more than one reason.  Barron Trump was, we'd note, baptized in an Episcopal Church, even though Catholics have a duty to raise their children as Catholics.

I don't know her current moral state, of course.  She's not seen much with Donald.  Given Trump's behavior, they may well be living as "brother and sister".  But the point is that she can't exactly be held up as an example of public female Catholicism.

Related threads:

The Four Things.