Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories
Full frame shot of pins that say “vote” with red, white, and blue American flag theme.

Spirit of 1776 – Rejected by Project 2025, Embraced by NPVIC

Eisenhower’s D‑Day Leadership Shows What America Has Lost

Eisenhower’s D‑Day Leadership Shows What America Has Lost

Anti-gerrymandering sign

Florida’s New Map and the Shrinking Window for Accountability

Rioters breach Capitol security Jan. 6

Trump’s 1776 Slush Fund Shows a New Level of Executive Abuse

Cathy Alderman: Housing Is Healthcare

Cathy Alderman: Housing Is Healthcare

Pope Leo XIV’s Rebuke of U.S. Immigration Policy Is a Wake-Up Call

Opinion

Pope Leo XIV’s Rebuke of U.S. Immigration Policy Is a Wake-Up Call

Pope Leo XIV says 'inhuman treatment of immigrants' in the U.S. isn't 'pro-life'

Credit: EWTN
Hugo Balta
By Hugo BaltaOct 02, 2025
Hugo Balta
Hugo Balta is a journalist, educator, and communicator. Hugo is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and a board member of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund, the parent organization of The Fulcrum. He is the publisher of the Latino News Network, a trainer with the Solutions Journalism Network, and an adjunct professor teaching journalism courses.
See More Writings by author

When Pope Leo XIV spoke from Castel Gandolfo this week, he didn’t mince words. The first American-born pontiff condemned the “inhuman treatment of immigrants in the United States,” challenging the moral consistency of Catholic politicians who claim to be pro-life while supporting harsh immigration policies.

“Someone who says ‘I’m against abortion’ but I’m in agreement with the inhuman treatment of immigrants in the United States, I don’t know if that’s pro-life,” Pope Leo said, in remarks that have since ricocheted across political and religious circles.

The Pope’s comments came amid controversy surrounding a proposed lifetime achievement award for Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, a Democrat known for his advocacy on immigration and his support for abortion rights. Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich had nominated Durbin for the honor, citing his “unwavering support of immigrants.” But Springfield Bishop Thomas Paprocki, who barred Durbin from receiving Communion in 2004, objected. The tension escalated until Durbin himself declined the award.

“I understand the difficulty and the tensions,” Pope Leo said. “But… it’s important to consider many issues related to the teaching of the Church.”

That’s the heart of the matter. Catholic social teaching is not a buffet. It demands a consistent ethic of life—one that honors the dignity of the unborn, the incarcerated, the poor, and the migrant. Pope Leo’s words reminds that being pro-life is not just about opposing abortion; it’s about opposing all forms of dehumanization.

This is not a new teaching. Pope Francis, Pope Benedict XVI, and Saint John Paul II all emphasized the interconnectedness of life issues. But Pope Leo’s American roots—and his willingness to name the United States directly—make this intervention especially potent.

The White House was quick to push back. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt rejected the Pope’s characterization, stating, “I would reject there is inhumane treatment of illegal immigrants in the United States under this administration.” She added that the government is “trying to enforce our nation’s laws in the most humane way possible.”

Leavitt also emphasized that President Trump “has done more to protect innocent life than any president in history,” citing his stance on abortion and his judicial appointments. “We welcome the Pope’s support for protecting innocent life,” she said, “and hope he will continue to advocate for the unborn.”

But the facts tell a different story. From family separations and prolonged detentions to the expansion of expedited removals and the use of ankle monitors on asylum seekers, the U.S. immigration system has routinely treated vulnerable people as threats rather than neighbors. The language of “illegality” obscures the humanity of those fleeing violence, poverty, and persecution.

Pope Leo’s challenge is not just political—it’s pastoral. He is calling Catholics to examine their consciences. Can a person claim to be pro-life if they support policies that traumatize children, criminalize desperation, and deny refuge?

This is especially relevant for Catholic lawmakers and voters. Too often, abortion becomes the sole litmus test for moral credibility, while other life issues are dismissed as “political.” But as Pope Leo reminds us, “Church teaching on each one of those issues is very clear.”

His words also offer a path forward. “I would ask, first and foremost, that there be greater respect for one another and that we search together… to find the way forward as Church.”

That search must begin with humility. It must include listening to migrants, refugees, and border communities. It must reckon with the racial and economic injustices embedded in our immigration system. And it must resist the temptation to weaponize faith for partisan gain.

Pope Leo XIV is not asking American Catholics to abandon their convictions. He is asking them to deepen them—to see the face of Christ not only in the unborn child but in the migrant mother, the detained father, the asylum-seeking teenager.

In doing so, he is reminding the faithful that pro-life is not a slogan. It is a summons. And it demands nothing less than a revolution of compassion.

-

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network. Balta is the only person to serve twice as president of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists (NAHJ).


Latest news

Full length of man unloading cardboard box from van
Economy

America Has Stopped Moving

Read More

The Future of DEI in Higher Education: Unpacking Recent Federal Restrictions
A group of people standing in a circle with their hands together
Photo by Shelby Murphy Figueroa on Unsplash

The Future of DEI in Higher Education: Unpacking Recent Federal Restrictions

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs serve diverse student populations at colleges and universities across the nation. DEI programs in higher education have traditionally supported first-generation college students, students with disabilities, veterans, low-income students, and racial and ethnic minorities through offices, scholarships, cultural centers, and accessibility services.
  • Federal initiatives, such as TRIO or the Full-Service Community Schools program, are facing cuts to funding due to DEI-related federal policy, affecting students across the nation.

Defining DEI

From debates surrounding race-conscious admission policies to questions about the role and funding of identity-based student centers, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) has become a widely debated topic in higher education policy. DEI refers to institutional policies and programs–such as mentorship opportunities, cultural centers, and support programs–which improve campus climate and student access for underrepresented groups. Though many colleges and universities across the United States have developed DEI initiatives aimed at shaping student access and institutional priorities, recent legal and policy developments have raised questions about how these efforts align with federal law.

Keep ReadingShow less
Rear view of teenage boy walking with arm around friends

Why many young men feel politically and socially adrift, how changing gender roles affect masculinity, self-esteem, relationships, and the future of society.

Maskot / Getty Images

Lost Boys - What Is the Role of a Man in Today's Society?

A recent New York Times article stated that young males who provided an important swing vote for Trump in 2024 are discouraged by what Trump has done and not done while in office. But they are nevertheless not particularly inclined to vote Democratic because they don't see the Party as welcoming their view of masculinity and they don't know where they fit in this society.

These young men assume that because the Party supports equality for women in the workplace and because many young women no longer have marriage and having children at the top of their agenda, the Party would not be a welcoming home for them. They see themselves as striving for the masculinity of their fathers' or grandfathers' day, where the man was the breadwinner in the family and had respect and authority. Not the weaker half in relationships with women.

Keep ReadingShow less
Showing Up and Staying: Disaster Relief in an Age of Distrust

NECHAMA volunteers in Western North Carolina after Hurricane Helene.

Showing Up and Staying: Disaster Relief in an Age of Distrust

As the Atlantic hurricane season officially began on June 1, disaster response organizations across the country are preparing for the next storm. That preparation includes coordinating logistics, purchasing supplies, training volunteers, and strengthening partnerships. It now also requires planning for an environment shaped by misinformation, distrust, and competing narratives.

A recent 60 Minutes segment examining extremist groups in disaster zones highlighted how quickly public perceptions can form after a disaster. Recovery efforts are now followed by outside groups and online networks attempting to influence how events are understood while communities are still in crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less
How State Courts Can Help Deflect the Supreme Court’s Latest Blow to Multiracial Democracy

Black and white illustration of voters

State Court Report

How State Courts Can Help Deflect the Supreme Court’s Latest Blow to Multiracial Democracy

With its April ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, the Supreme Court delivered yet another blow to the Voting Rights Act, specifically Section 2, which governs race in redistricting. The decision was sad and utterly predictable, but still nothing short of astonishing. Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the Court’s conservative supermajority, stealthily setting aside 40 years of legal precedent under Section 2 largely on the belief that racism is a thing of the past and extreme partisan gerrymandering is, in effect, a fundamental right of state lawmakers. Callais had a tortured path to the Court, a feature of the case that has undoubtedly been eclipsed by the lawless nature of the ruling itself, all of which reveals that the Supreme Court represents the gravest threat to multiracial democracy in the United States. (I argued as much in a law review article, predicting the outcome and analyzing the ways a Court gone rogue might get to that ruling.)

What’s more? In recent years, the Court has played fast and loose with a “principle” purportedly meant to limit chaos around elections, known as Purcell. But instead of limiting chaos, the Court’s Purcell jurisprudence will hasten and aggrandize the already-problematic impact of the Callais ruling. As the nation’s redistricting wars inevitably continue — in this election season, the 2028 presidential campaign, and even the next decade — state courts can help stave off democratic erosion by resisting the urge to invoke Purcell.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026