Bill Donohue

Houses of worship need enhanced protection these days from anti-religious bigots. In recent times, virtually every major religion has had some of their houses of worship vandalized or invaded. Moreover, congregants have been subjected to taunts and threats. At stake is the First Amendment right to freely practice our religion.

While this is a nation-wide problem, it is a pressing concern to New Yorkers. Jews, in particular, have been targeted more than any religious group. What happened last November was despicable. Two hundred protesters showed up outside Manhattan’s Park East Synagogue holding vile anti-Jewish signs. They also yelled vicious comments at Jews going to synagogue, taunting them ferociously. This was totally unprovoked and totally indefensible.

Fortunately, the New York City Council elected a Speaker in January who is standing up against these bullies. Julie Menin is leading the fight against attacks on all houses of worship. I wrote to her today expressing our support for her efforts, requesting we play an active role. She is being sent recent news releases I have written on this subject.

Included in this batch are statements I have made about Mayor Zohran Mamdani. As you can see, his religious messaging is very troubling, and his penchant for hiring religious bigots is just as ominous. This does not bode well for the future, which is why the Catholic League supports Speaker Menin’s call for legislation that would provide greater protection for houses of worship.

The First Amendment means nothing unless it is enforced. That means that those who seek to undermine religious liberty must be defeated. The Catholic League is delighted to join the fight.

Bill Donohue

They really are different. They are not like the rest of us. A recent Gallup poll sheds some light on this phenomenon.

In 2012, only 3.5 percent of Americans identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or something else (they must be the + people). Today the figure is 9 percent. Most of these people, 5 percent, say they are bisexual; the fewest are transgender (they appear to be bottoming out). Demographically, they are an interesting bunch.

Gallup found that young people, women, Democrats and city residents were the most likely to be LGBTQ+ (there was no significant difference on the basis of race and ethnicity). That’s true, though it is incomplete. Other variables should have been probed.

The older the person is, the more likely he is straight. This is true across the board for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Overall, 23.0 percent of 18-29 year-olds identity as belonging to one of these four subgroups, but only 2.3 percent of seniors do (those 65+). This stands to reason given that traditional moral values have been sliding for decades, eclipsed by radical individualism.

Women are more likely than men to belong to one of these subgroups. What the researchers did not report is that girls are the biggest users of social media, and this explains why they are also the most likely to identify as a trans person. Social media can be a debilitating force, one that preys on the emotionally vulnerable.

Gallup says that Democrats are more likely to be LGBTQ+, and that is because they are the most supportive of their status. True. But why? Democrats, much more than Republicans, favor big government, but that has nothing to do with being straight or not. Something is missing. That something is religion and education.

Gallup, as well as other pollsters, has consistently found that Democrats are by far the most secular segment of the population: they are much more likely to be agnostic, atheist or have no religious affiliation. We know from a mountain of data that these people are the least likely to support traditional moral values.

Those with graduate degrees—especially those with post-graduate degrees—tend to be secularists, and are thus given to prize autonomy over traditional moral values. They are disproportionately urban dwellers, and have always been more inclined than rural folks to reject religion and a traditional understanding of sexuality; nothing has changed. The diversity that city life affords may generate a “live and let live” attitude, but beware of popping the champagne: like any value, its extreme manifestations have a corrupting effect.

California is home to the “live and let live” population, and this helps to explain why the young people who live there are 40 percent more likely to identify as transgender than the national average. The greater the tolerance, the greater the number who experiment, and with that comes all the negative consequences associated with this mentally challenging condition. Not something that deserves our applause.

In other words, it is not surprising that farm boys who go to church are not likely to show up at an LGBTQ+ event. Indeed, just imagining what this would look like boggles the mind—guys with straw hats, overalls and a Bible dancing around with a Pride flag!

Nope. That’s for the deracinated, the ones who think they can follow their own moral compass and live happily ever after. Good luck with that.

Kyle Nazareth

In January, Texas and Florida took bold steps that could reshape legal education nationwide by ending the American Bar Association’s (ABA) role as the sole gatekeeper for bar admission. These decisions mark the beginning of the end for the ABA’s monopoly and expose a deeper problem: the organization’s accreditation standards, particularly its aggressive push for “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI), and hostility toward religious institutions.

For decades, the ABA dominated legal education, setting standards that nearly every state required for bar eligibility. The ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar enforced seemingly neutral requirements on faculty qualifications, bar passage rates, and curriculum. Yet beneath the appearance of neutrality, the ABA has increasingly imposed progressive mandates on law schools while threatening the schools’ accreditation. For example, Standard 206, though suspended since early 2025 and extended through August 2026, originally required law schools to demonstrate “concrete action” toward diversity in student bodies, faculties, and staff with respect to race, ethnicity, and gender.

Critics, including 21 Republican state attorneys general and the Trump administration, argued that this DEI standard violated civil rights laws and the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.  U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi urged the ABA to drop the standard entirely, warning that even vague “commitment to diversity” language could expose state bars to legal liability and jeopardize the ABA’s federally recognized accreditor status.

The ABA’s DEI initiatives have gone beyond accreditation, sometimes resulting in overt discrimination. In 2024, following complaints, the ABA revised its Judicial Clerkship Program to remove race-based quotas. Separately, in early 2025, after conservative advocacy groups urged the EEOC to investigate further alleged race-based preferences, the ABA broadened eligibility criteria for its Diversity Clerkship Program.

In February 2025, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chair Andrew Ferguson restricted FTC political appointees from holding ABA leadership roles or participating in ABA activities in an official capacity, citing the organization’s history of partisan advocacy, including biased judicial-nominee ratings and amicus briefs on affirmative action, transgender ideology, capital punishment, and abortion. And in 2024, the ABA adopted Resolution 503 opposing state government requirements to display the Ten Commandments in public schools, citing the historical constitutional canard of “separation of church and state.”

The ABA also has a pattern of conflict with religious law schools. In August 2025, the organization found St. Thomas University College of Law in Miami out of compliance with the nondiscrimination Standard 205(c), likely because the school declined to fund an LGBTQ student group’s Pride Parade trip, citing its Catholic mission. Though subsection (c) explicitly protects religiously affiliated schools’ ability to align policies with their faith, the ABA treated fidelity to Church teaching as a violation of equality. Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier defended the Catholic law school, condemning the move as “discriminatory” and anti-religious, vowing to protect state schools from such overreach. Consequently, on December 5, 2025, the ABA backed off, issuing a public notice concluding that St. Thomas University College of Law was in full compliance.

Similar clashes have occurred before. Brigham Young University’s J. Reuben Clark Law School faced complaints about the school’s alleged practice of expelling students who left the Mormon faith or were in homosexual relationships. The ABA investigated but ultimately closed the investigation without action. Regent University School of Law had a prolonged accreditation struggle in the late 1980s and early 1990s, with ABA accreditors questioning a required faculty statement of faith and tenure policies as threats to academic freedom. Only after considerable adjustments did it gain full accreditation.

These cases reveal inclusion’s irony: the ABA promotes inclusion while punishing schools holding traditional religious beliefs on sexuality and morality. Secular schools can enforce progressive norms, but faith-based schools risk losing accreditation for refusing to host activities at odds with their doctrine. This is coercion, not neutrality.

Texas and Florida’s move away from the ABA favors ideologically neutral criteria, affordability, and open debate. Governor Ron DeSantis said Florida’s choice ends the ABA’s “highly partisan” gatekeeping. States like Ohio and Tennessee may soon follow.

The Catholic League applauds these steps. When one group controls accreditation in the name of inclusion, it ends up excluding dissent, religious liberty, and varied academic approaches. Ending the ABA’s dominance advances true pluralism, allowing law schools to thrive without sacrificing their mission.

Bill Donohue

Major media outlets, with rare exception, are engaged in a massive cover-up of the identity of transgender shooters in Canada and Rhode Island. They don’t want the public to conclude the obvious: those who falsely claim to be of the opposite sex are mentally impaired and a disproportionate number are increasingly violent. What happened in both venues is disturbing enough without lying about the identity of the killers.

On February 10, 2026 Jesse Van Rootselaar, an 18-year-old man who falsely claimed to be a woman, entered the Tumbler Ridge Secondary School in Tumbler Ridge, Canada and opened fire on students and teachers. The shooter killed seven people, including six students, injuring dozens more before committing suicide. 

On February 16, Robert Dorgan, a 56-year-old man who falsely claimed to be a woman, opened fire at a high school hockey game in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. He shot and killed one of his sons, as well as the mother of his children, and critically shot his other two sons and a family friend. He then fatally shot himself. It was later revealed that he went through gender reassignment surgery and was described as having a narcissistic-personality disorder. 

If it were not for sexual identity politics, every media outlet would (a) identify the killers are transgender and (b) identify them as male. Not only did the media, overall, merit an “F” on these measures, many were inconsistent with how they depicted the two incidents. 

TV

ABC mentioned the Canadian shooter was transgender and referred to him as “she.” It mentioned the Rhode Island shooter’s name change and did not use any pronouns to describe him.

CBS said the Canadian shooter was transgender, and referred to him as “she.” It also mentioned that the Rhode Island shooter was transgender but referred to him as “he.” 

NBC reported the Canadian shooter was transgender, and referred to him as “they.” It mentioned the Rhode Island shooter name change and referred to him as a man.

PBS said the Canadian shooter was transgender, and referred to him as “she.” It mentioned the Rhode Island shooter’s name change, and referred to him as “he.”

CNN reported the Canadian shooter was transgender, and referred to him as “she.” It mentioned the Rhode Island shooter was transgender, and referred to him as “he.”

MSNOW did not mention the Canadian shooter was transgender, and did not use any pronouns to describe the Rhode Island shooter.

Fox News mentioned the Canadian shooter was transgender, and referred to the Rhode Island shooter as “he.”

Newspapers

New York Times mentioned the Canadian shooter was transgender, and did not use a pronoun to refer to the Rhode Island shooter.

Washington Post did not mention the Canadian shooter was transgender, and referred to him as “she.” It mentioned the Rhode Island shooter was transgender, and did not use pronouns to refer to him.

Los Angeles Times did not mention the Canadian shooter was transgender, and referred to him as “she.” It said the Rhode Island shooter was transgender, and did not use pronouns to refer to him.

USA Today mentioned the Canadian shooter was transgender, and referred to him as “she.” It mentioned the Rhode Island shooter was transgender, and referred to him as “he.”

Chicago Tribune did not mention the Canadian shooter was transgender, and referred to him as “she.” It mentioned the Rhode Island shooter was transgender, and did not use pronouns to refer to him.

Associated Press did not mention the Canadian shooter was transgender, and referred to him as “she.” It mentioned the Rhode Island shooter was transgender, and did not use pronouns to refer to him.

Here are some observations to ponder.

NBC is so illiterate, and ideologically bankrupt, that they falsely referred to a man as “they”? To top it off, NBC actually apologized for calling a Swedish skier who is a biological woman but falsely claims to be a man as “she.” But she is a “she”!

Notice the way the same media outlets that falsely referred to the Canadian shooter as “she,” invariably referred to the Rhode Island shooter—correctly—as “he.” 

Which begs the question: Are the Canadian people so far gone that the media dare not accurately tell them that a man who identifies as a female is in fact a male? 

Just as bad, have the media no uniform standards, inventing different ways to describe the same phenomenon? 

Are they that corrupt?

Michael P. McDonald

The AP Style Guide sets the tone for both print and electronic media, even conservative outlets are impacted. Consider what the AP Style Guide has to say on the matter of transgender ideology. It commands writers to only use preferred pronouns and makes allowance for the use of the singular “they.”  The guide promotes the unscientific notions “sex assigned at birth” and “nonbinary/gender fluid” people. Indeed, the AP Style Guide appears to be ripped right out of the manifesto of the most militant trans activist.

While Fox News and the New York Post have reputations of representing right of center perspectives, in recent years both outlets have quietly embraced the woke left’s distortion of the English language and rejection of the laws of biology in the name of transgenderism. Both have used, and continue to use, the approved language of transgenderism in their reporting, making them virtually indistinguishable from their competitors in the mainstream media.

For instance, on January 13, 2026, both Fox News and the New York Post featured stories about the Supreme Court examining the ability of the states to protect girls’ sports from boys. Both outlets refer to the male athletes involved in the legal challenge with feminine pronouns.  

In other instances, both outlets take pains to avoid pronouns altogether and continually refer to the individuals by their last names. While this at least solves the pronoun problem, the articles are inevitably framed around “transgender women” but never once is it acknowledged that this is a man who falsely claims to be a woman. This appears to be both outlets’ preferred strategy when dealing with high profile figures such as Congressman Sarah McBride (DE-D), the only member of Congress that openly claims a transgender status. Although on August 2, 2025, New York Post used female pronouns to refer to McBride.

With that said, there have been some efforts to reflect biological realities and respect the rules of grammar. However, the only time either Fox News or the New York Post observes these is when reporting on individuals who claim a transgender status that have committed serious crimes. Though this appears to be a more recent development.

For instance, in 2022 both outlets covered the case of Demetrius “Demi” Minor, who killed his foster father stabbing him 27 times. Minor claimed to be a woman and was incarcerated in New Jersey’s only female prison. During his time in the women’s prison, Minor had sex with two female inmates who became pregnant. 

Of course, if you read the article posted on Fox’s website on July 17, 2022, you may not have realized this was about a man in a women’s prison. The headline reads, “NJ transgender woman transferred from women’s only prison after impregnating 2 inmates, report says.” The sanity, not to mention the rules of the English language, rapidly deteriorates from there. When describing how Minor was moved to a new facility, the article reads that he “is the only woman” confined there.

The New York Post was not any better in its coverage. In an article that ran on August 5, 2022, this line appeared: “she had impregnated two other inmates.” This is a complete bastardization of English. 

But, beginning in 2023, following the horrific attack on the Covenant Christian School in Nashville, in which a woman who falsely claimed to be a man killed six people including three young children, both outlets have used the correct pronouns for people who claim a transgender status involved in violent crimes. In the cases of Audrey Hale (Covenant Christian School, March 27, 2023), Robert “Robin” Westman (Annunciation Catholic School, August 27, 2025), Jesse Van Rootselaar (Tumble Ridge, British Columbia, February 10, 2026), and Robert “Roberta Esposito” Dorgan (Pawtucket, RI, February 16, 2026) both outlets accurately reflected biological reality in their coverage.

It would appear that the only time Fox News and the New York Post deviate from the transgender convictions of their counterparts in the mainstream media is when the subject has committed a truly gruesome act and no one in their right mind will rush to ensure you are using his preferred pronouns. This is hardly a principled stand in defense of reason and common sense.

Bill Donohue discusses his new book, Christianity in the Crosshairs: Ruling Class and Radicals Find a Common Enemy, with Laurence Jarvik. To watch, click here.

The attempt to discriminate against Christians at a cooperative apartment complex in Westchester County, New York failed. Those who run the cooperative allowed the display of a menorah in the common area, but not a nativity scene. They failed because we intervened.

What makes this story so bizarre is that the same issue took place last Christmas, and in the same building in Larchmont, New York! The only difference is that the building management company is new and the resident who complained is new. But the facts are the same.

Bill Donohue wrote to the new Property Manager company, recounting the story from last year. He said the display of a menorah was “commendable.” But he hastened to add, “What is not commendable is the refusal to display a nativity scene. Indeed, it is illegal.”

Donohue’s letter was dated December 10 and we gave them until December 15 to either display the nativity scene, along with the menorah, or take down the menorah. The letter was emailed to them in the morning of December 10 (and sent in the overnight mail) and that very afternoon they removed the menorah, and a Christmas tree.

They could have settled this issue by simply displaying the crèche, but their idea of neutrality was to ban both the menorah and the manger scene. We prefer the tolerant alternative; they prefer the intolerant option.

“The menorah, like the crèche,” Donohue wrote, “is a religious symbol; the Christmas tree is a secular symbol. This is not my opinion—this is the interpretation afforded by the U.S. Supreme Court. So you can either allow all religious symbols to be displayed, or you can deny both of them: You cannot chose one and deny the other.”

Ironically, it was last year’s confrontation with a different management group that ran this cooperative that led us to contact over 2,000 Homeowner Associations (HOA) in November, alerting them to the religious rights of their residents. We never thought we would have to swing into action again to stop discrimination against Christians in the same cooperative.

The Fair Housing Act of 1968 makes is clear that if one religious symbol is displayed in a common area, others must also be allowed. Supreme Court decisions on the display of religious symbols on public property are also accommodating. This is a serious religious liberty issue.

It is a sad commentary on the co-op board of this property that they thought they could get away with their bigoted stunt two years in a row. But their determination to discriminate was met with our equally determined decision to stop them.

In early December, before we erected our nativity scene in Central Park, Bill Donohue told the staff that this was the first time in 30 years that we have displayed our crèche that he was concerned it may not be safe. Regrettably, he was right.

On December 26, a video was posted on Instagram showing a man (assisted by two others) draping a large keffiyeh, a symbol of Palestinian nationalism, on the shoulders of the statue of Our Blessed Mother; he tried to place a Palestinian flag in the hands of Joseph, but failed.

We contacted the New York City Parks Department, which granted us the permit; we also reported this to the police. We did not make a public statement until January 5, the day it was taken down.

What happened is in stark contrast to what happened in 1995. Here is what Donohue wrote in 2015 about that day.

“In 1995, when we displayed our first nativity scene in Central Park, Monsignor John G. Woolsey blessed it in front of our staff. Just as we were about to walk away, a beautiful rainbow appeared above. But it didn’t shine everywhere—it shone directly on our crèche. We take that as a sign that more than the public approves of our display.”

We take that as a sign that we are doing the right thing. That is why what happened this year will not intimidate us one bit.

William A. Donohue

It is an understatement to say that the Catholic League will miss Cardinal Timothy Dolan—he is a very special man. He always fought for justice, and his amiable character won the applause of Catholics and non-Catholics alike. He was certainly very kind to me.

We met for the first time on April 15, 2009, when he was installed as the new Archbishop of New York. I was waiting on the steps of St. Patrick’s Cathedral as he exited, and after he spotted me, he came over to greet me. I told him something he repeated many times—to me and others: “You are my Irish terrier and I am your pit bull.”

Though we did not meet until he came to New York, I had a working relationship with Dolan when he was Archbishop of Milwaukee. I mentioned this in my news release of February 23, 2009, the day the news broke that he was selected to run the New York archdiocese.

“In the fall of 2007, the Catholic League launched a boycott and PR campaign against the Miller Brewing Company for its sponsorship of a vile anti-Catholic gay event, the Folsom Street Fair, in San Francisco. After six weeks of pounding Miller, we got what we wanted: an apology for four anti-Catholic incidents and a pledge not to sponsor the event again.”

We would not have succeeded without the support of Archbishop Dolan. Miller officials complained to him about my campaign against them, but to no avail: he said he was on our side.

Similarly, in 2023, after I registered my objections with Rob Manfred, the Commissioner of Baseball, for allowing the Los Angeles Dodgers to honor an anti-Catholic gay group on “Pride Night,” he called Dolan to protest my public stance. Dolan told him to call me. “I’m sure Bill will be glad to talk to you.” Manfred never called.

Soon after Dolan became Archbishop of New York, he took me to a Broadway play. Later in 2009, he invited the entire board of directors of the Catholic League to have dinner in his residence. His support for our mission was unyielding.

One reason why Dolan was always in our corner was his commitment to the rights of accused priests. It is well known that he has been busy trying to afford just compensation to those who have suffered at the hands of offending priests—almost all the abuse took place decades ago—but less well known is his defense of priests who have been unfairly maligned.

Cardinal Dolan was quickly embraced by his brother bishops. In 2010, he was elected president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. He led with distinction, taking on the unfair measures of Obamacare that sought to penalize Catholic non-profits, such as the Little Sisters of the Poor.

It is a tribute to his non-partisanship that he was asked to close both the Democratic and the Republican national conventions. But his fairness never stood in the way of being outspoken about contemporary issues. He was not tied to the politics of the left or the right.

The Catholic League has come to the defense of many priests, bishops and cardinals, but no one has been consistently more grateful than Cardinal Dolan. Always honest, he does not hold back in expressing his appreciation.

I prize the many radio and TV interviews I did with him. Whenever I had a new book published, he invited me to speak with him. There were other occasions, too, such as his greeting of the homeless on Ash Wednesday outside St. Francis of Assisi, near Penn Station—they are given breakfast—that are memorable. I especially recall him giving me a Coors stein (our favorite beer is Coors Light) a few years ago.

In 2023, we celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Catholic League at the New York Athletic Club. Cardinal Dolan was the keynote speaker, and he did not disappoint. What stood out the most was not so much his formal comments—it was his discussions with those in attendance. He worked the room, meeting virtually everyone, winning them over with his characteristic jovial demeanor.

Running the New York archdiocese is a daunting task, but it is one that suits the new archbishop. Archbishop Ronald Hicks is young and vibrant, and will be able to put his considerable administrative experience to good use. We look forward to working with him.

It did not take long for Cardinal Dolan to win over the hearts of New Yorkers, and it our sincere hope that Archbishop Hicks will do the same.

Portland, Oregon had a hard time handling Christmas in 2025. Bill Donohue sent the following letter to Portland Mayor Keith Wilson on December 2.

I understand you presided over the Christmas Tree lighting ceremony in Pioneer Courthouse Square on November 28. But for some reason— phobia? bigotry?—the word “Christmas” was omitted. This creates a dilemma for you. What are you going to do for the rest of the Christmas season when there are plenty of Christmas celebrations taking place in Portland?

Will you call the Christmas Ships Parade the “Ships Parade”? Will you rename the Tuba Christmas Concert the “Tuba Concert”? Will you change the name of the Silverton Christmas Market to the “Silverton Market”? Will you switch the Singing Christmas Tree to the “Singing Tree”? Now it gets really tricky.

What are you going to do about the gospel singers at Gospel Christmas? Looks like you’ve been checkmated: both words are verboten in super-secular Portland. What are you going to do about the scheduled performance of Handel’s Messiah? Can you really allow the word “Messiah” to be said at Christmastime? In the Old Testament “Messiah” means “theAnointed One,” and in the New Testament it means “Christ.” Moreover, in Part I, the Messiah’s coming and the virgin birth are predicted by the Old Testament prophets. Can this be tolerated in Portland?

Are you aware of the fact that this composition is based on the King James Bible and the Coverdale Psalter? As you know, the former is an early English translation of the Bible, but are you aware that the latter is a 16th century translation of the Psalms, written by Bishop Miles Coverdale? The first lines of Psalm 1 and Psalm 2 carry special meaning to Portland. Psalm 1 says, “Blessed is the man who has not followed the advice of the ungodly,” and Psalm 2 reads, “Why do the heathen rage so furiously?” Seems like you are well-suited to provide an answer.

Now for the clincher. What are you going to do about the Christmas Festival of Lights that will take place at The Grotto? This venue is a Catholic sanctuary, formally known at the National Sanctuary of Our Sorrowful Mother. Do you know who she is? Do you know that they allow Masses to be offered at The Grotto, as well as saying the Rosary, and that priests hear confessions? Can this actually be happening in 2025 in Portland?

Looks like you’re in a pickle. Either you engage in religious cleansing—scrubbing Portland free of any Christian symbolisms—or you stop with this nihilistic attack on Christianity and let Christians celebrate Christmas, without it being neutered by its enemies.

Something to think about.

Merry Christmas!

We heard from the mayor’s Deputy Chief of Staff. We were told that they sang Christmas carols at the event, including religious songs, thus denying any exhibition of bigotry. But there was no mention of why they refused to talk about a Christmas tree, nor did they say why they allowed a pro-Palestinian performance at this Christmas gathering. In short, they tried to hoodwink us. They failed. We thought you’d like to know.