Religious Liberty and Congress
2025 Annual Report of the Committee for Religious Liberty
Section III
Section III: Religious Liberty and Congress
Few bills in Congress in 2024 directly addressed religious liberty. However, some legislation that could have had the effect of burdening religion or reducing burdens on religion has been proposed. Several of the issues highlighted in the 2023–2024 Annual Report continue to present concerns. However, with the government divided in 2024, Congress was not able to move on these bills.
Ongoing Concerns
The previous Annual Report identified several areas of concern in federal legislation that the USCCB continues to monitor.
The Equality Act
The Equality Act is a sweeping bill that would amend numerous federal nondiscrimination laws to prohibit “sexual orientation and gender identity” discrimination, and impose an abortion mandate, while explicitly exempting itself from the bipartisan Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The Equality Act would bring about a number deleterious effects, including requiring taxpayers to fund elective abortions, mandating that doctors and counselors must perform and promote life-altering gender “transitions” (even when they do not think it is in the best interests of their patient), forcing women’s prisons to be open to men who self-identify as women, and many other similar harms.
In 2021, the House passed the Equality Act, but it stalled in the Senate. The bill was re-introduced in 2023 and added 2 Senate cosponsors in 2024. It is led in the House by Rep. Mark Takano (D-CA-39) and is cosponsored by every Democrat and no Republicans; Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) leads in the Senate, cosponsored by 47 Democrats, 3 Independents, and no Republicans. President Biden repeatedly called for its passage. With unified Republican control of Congress and the White House, it is unlikely to move forward in 2025, while yet remaining a high priority for Democrat members.[3]
The Secure the Border Act
The Secure the Border Act (SBA) would restrict religious organizations from accessing federal funding. Specifically, the SBA has two provisions aimed at organizations serving newcomers. Section 115(b) of the bill presents a square religious liberty issue. It would defund any organization that “facilitates or encourages unlawful activity, including unlawful entry.” Some Republicans in Congress have made clear that they think the mere provision to migrants of basic humanitarian aid like food, water, and shelter constitutes facilitation of unlawful entry, and that the religious charities’ assistance to migrants encourages them to cross the border illegally in the first place. This bar on funding would apply to all funds from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, including disaster relief programs and grants to help nonprofits make their facilities safe from acts of terrorism and other extremist attacks, even if the religious charity is providing this humanitarian aid entirely out of its own pocket, outside of any government-funded program.
The other section, 115(c), defunds particular programs rather than particular charities. It would zero out any funding from the Department of Homeland Security for “transportation, lodging, or immigration legal services to inadmissible aliens.” Bishop Mark Seitz, chair of the USCCB Committee on Migration, issued a letter opposing the bill, noting: “[T]his legislation contains such a combination of harmful measures that we believe its passage, on the whole, is beyond justification.”[4]
The SBA passed the House in 2023 by a vote of 219-213. It is led in the House by Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart (R-FL-26) and has 21 cosponsors, all Republicans; Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) leads in the Senate, with 32 Republican cosponsors. The Senate companion was not acted upon during the 118th Congress.
The Women’s Health Protection Act
The Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA) would impose abortion on demand nationwide at any stage of pregnancy through federal statute. Immediately upon passage, the WHPA would invalidate state laws protecting the preborn from abortion, even late in a pregnancy, and including laws that prohibit abortion based on race, sex, disability, or other characteristics. It would likely trump conscience laws, state and federal, that protect the right of health care providers and professionals, employers, and insurers not to perform, assist in, refer for, cover, or pay for abortion. WHPA expressly eliminates defenses under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
The House passed the Women’s Health Protection Act in 2021 and in 2022, but it stalled in the Senate. At that time, Archbishop William Lori, then chair of the USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities, and Cardinal Timothy Dolan, then chair of the Committee for Religious Liberty, expressed strong opposition to the bill in a letter to the Senate.[5] In 2023, it was introduced by Rep. Judy Chue (D-CA-28) and Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI). In 2024, the WHPA added 3 cosponsors to give it 215 cosponsors in the House (all Democrats), and it added 1 cosponsor to bring it to 49 cosponsors in the Senate—46 Democrats and 3 Independents. President Biden called for its passage. This bill is not likely to move forward in 2025.
The Equal Campus Access Act
The Equal Campus Access Act, introduced by Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) and Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI-5), would prohibit universities receiving federal funds from the U.S. Department of Education from discriminating against religious student groups. It received USCCB support in 2019, when Bishop Robert McManus, who was chair of the Committee for Religious Liberty, joined a coalition letter calling on Senators to include the Equal Campus Act in significant legislation regarding higher education.[6]
The Equal Campus Access Act was included in the Accreditation for College Excellence Act of 2023, which passed the House in September 2024. The Senate did not act on the bill.
New Issues and Legislation
IVF Bills
Following an Alabama state supreme court ruling considering frozen embryos in IVF clinics as persons, there has been intense bipartisan interest among policymakers in legally enshrining rights or promoting access to IVF or assisted reproductive technologies (ART) more broadly. Related bills that have been introduced include the Access to Family Building Act, the IVF Protection Act, and Right to IVF Act, among others.
The IVF Protection Act was introduced in the Senate by Ted Cruz in May 2024. The bill ties Medicaid funding to access to IVF. Under the Act, states that prohibit IVF lose Medicaid funding.
The Access to Family Building Act and Right to IVF Act present significant problems for religious liberty, as well as human life and dignity. The Act former was introduced in the Senate by Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) in January 2024. It creates a statutory right to access ARTs and preempts state laws that could impede access. While the USCCB opposes this bill primarily because IVF violates human dignity—as it involves the destruction of unborn children at a massive scale—the USCCB also noted in its opposition that the bill would exempt itself from the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Since the bill orders that private entities cannot interfere with access to these technologies, it would attempt to seek to Catholic institutions to facilitate these immoral procedures.
The Right to IVF Act was introduced by Tammy Duckworth in the Senate in June 2024. Like the other Duckworth bill, this Act would preempt state laws that could hinder access to IVF. Moreover, it requires insurance companies to cover IVF. In short, these bills represent the introduction of an IVF mandate into Congress, a mandate with which Catholic institutions cannot comply.
The USCCB opposed these Acts.[7] Thus far, they have failed to clear procedural votes.
The RESTORE Act represents an alternative approach to the problem that pro-IVF bills attempt to solve. It is certainly true that many couples who desire to conceive a child suffer obstacles. The Catholic Church has long supported evidence-based therapies that seek to help these couples while respecting the dignity of human life. The RESTORE Act, introduced by Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS) in the Senate in June 2024, aims to expand and promote research and data collection on reproductive health conditions, and to provide training opportunities for medical professionals to learn how to diagnose and treat reproductive health conditions with an ethical restorative approach.
Conscience Protection Act
The Conscience Protection Act (CPA) aims to ensure that people and organizations who provide health care or coverage can do so without being forced to violate their consciences by participating in abortion. While there are a number of laws protecting conscience rights, they can only be enforced by HHS. However, too often, HHS has refused to enforce the law.
The CPA addresses the lack of enforcement of existing laws, most notably by establishing a private right of action allowing victims of discrimination to defend their own rights in federal court. Lawsuits do not guarantee that every plaintiff wins his or her case, but the ability to seek relief in the courts would at least allow victims to make their case and puts discriminators on notice that rampant disregard for conscience rights must stop, or there will be real costs. The CPA also clarifies current law, such as by articulating that health plans and employer sponsors cannot be forced to pay for abortion, and by authorizing penalties separate from legally unsettled government funding conditions.
The CPA was introduced in both chambers in June 2024, led by Sen. James Lankford in the Senate, with 20 Republican cosponsors, and led by Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN-3) in the House, with 44 Republican cosponsors. The USCCB has long supported the CPA.[8]
Safeguarding Charity Act
In response to two courts that ruled that tax-exempt status constitutes Federal financial assistance, the Safeguarding Charity Act makes clear that Federal financial assistance does not include tax-exempt status. The bill was introduced in both chambers in January 2024, led by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) in the Senate with 9 cosponsors, and led by Rep. Gregory Steube (R-FL-17) in the House with 19 cosponsors. As of this writing, the USCCB has not taken a position on the Safeguarding Charity Act.
Antisemitism Awareness Act
The Antisemitism Awareness Act (AAA) was introduced in 2023 in response to antisemitic incidents on college campuses. It would direct the Department of Education (USDE) to use the definition of antisemitism put forward by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in its enforcement of anti-discrimination laws. Per IHRA, “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” The bill would also direct the USDE to adopt IHRA’s examples of antisemitism. The AAA passed the House in May 2024. It was introduced in the Senate in April 2024 by Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) and has 30 cosponsors—14 Democrats, 1 Independent, and 15 Republicans. As of this writing, the USCCB has not taken a position on the AAA.
Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act
The Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act was introduced in the House by Claudia Tenney (R-NY-24) in September 2024. The bill gives the Secretary of the Treasury the power to designate nonprofits as terrorist supporting organizations and remove their tax-exempt status at his or her discretion. It has raised concerns among nonprofits, including religious nonprofits, that an administration could target nonprofit organizations it opposes. It has 4 cosponsors—2 Democrats and 2 Republicans—and passed the House in November 2024 with a vote of 219-184. The USCCB has not taken a position on this bill.
Investigation of Faith-Based Investors
This year, the House Judiciary Committee, led by Jim Jordan (R-OH-4), announced its investigation into the activities of investment companies who seek to achieve climate goals through various forms of shareholder activism. The Committee claims that these investment groups are colluding to bring about the reduction of goods and services, adversely affecting trade and thus violating anti-trust laws.
The groups under investigation are members of Climate Action 100+, a coalition of investors who work to reduce emissions. The Committee sent a letter to all members ordering document holds and warning of possible subpoenas.
Many of the groups facing this investigation are faith-based. Several of the companies are Catholic and follow the USCCB’s investment guidelines.[9] These guidelines lay out a range of concerns to consider when making investment decisions. They are rooted in Catholic principles: Protecting Human Life; Promoting Human Dignity; Enhancing the Common Good; Pursuing Economic Justice; and Saving Our Global Common Home. While it does not seem that this investigation is targeting religious groups, it is concerning that the freedom of religious groups to make investment decisions informed by their faith appears not to be taken into account. The groups may suffer reputational harm, and many of them are small, mission-driven organizations that do not have the capacity to defend themselves against attacks by the federal government.
[3] For more on the Equality Act, see “Truth about the Equality Act” at www.usccb.org/equality-act.
[4] Bishop Mark Seitz, “Letter to the House of Representatives Regarding the Secure the Border Act,” 5 May 2023: www.usccb.org/resources/letter-house-representatives-regarding-secure-border-act-may-5-2023.
[5] Archbishop William Lori and Cardinal Timothy Dolan, “Letter to Senators in Opposition to the Women’s Health Protection Act,” 23 February 2022: www.usccb.org/resources/womens-health-protection-act-opposition-letter.
[6] Bishop McManus, “Letter to Senators Supporting Equal Campus Access Act,” 12 September 2019: www.usccb.org/resources/bishop-mcmanus-letter-senators-supporting-equal-campus-access-act.
[7] Archbishop Boris Gudziak, Bishop Michael Burbidge, Bishop Robert Barron, and Bishop Kevin Rhoades, “Letter to the Senate opposing the Access to Family Building Act,” 28 February 2024: www.usccb.org/resources/letter-senate-opposing-access-family-building-act; Bishop Michael Burbidge and Bishop Robert Barron, “Letter to the Senate opposing the IVF Protection Act,” 7 June 2024: www.usccb.org/resources/letter-senate-opposing-ivf-protection-act-june-7-2024; Bishop Robert Barron, Bishop Michael Burbidge, and Bishop Kevin Rhoades, “Letter to the Senate supporting the RESTORE Act and opposing the Right to IVF Act,” 13 June 2024: www.usccb.org/resources/letter-senate-supporting-restore-act-and-opposing-right-ivf-act.
[8] Most recently, see Bishop Michael Burbidge and Bishop Kevin Rhoades, “Letter to Senate renewing support for Conscience Protection Act,” 18 June 2024: www.usccb.org/resources/letter-senate-renewing-support-conscience-protection-act.
[9] See “Socially Responsible Investment Guidelines for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops,” November 2021: www.usccb.org/resources/socially-responsible-investment-guidelines-2021-united-states-conference-catholic-bishops.