From LifeSiteNews

By Matt Lamb

Priests are automatically excommunicated if they break the Seal of Confession, according to canon law.

The Washington state Senate passed legislation to throw priests in jail for almost a full year for maintaining the Seal of Confession.

Senator Noel Frame, a Democrat, is on her third attempt to force priests to divulge what they hear during Confession if it concerns abuse. Last year, a bill backed by the Washington Catholic Conference, though not by all bishops in the state, died.

This year, Frame’s bill includes no exemptions at all for the religious liberties of priests. It passed the state senate 28 to 20 – all but two Democrats voted to violate the religious freedom of Catholics and remove the clergy-penitent privilege. All Republicans voted against the measure on February 28. A House version is now in committee waiting a further vote.

Senate Bill 5375 and House Bill 1211 in the state of Washington are “no exemption” bills that remove all protections for what priests hear in confession when it comes to alleged abuse. Frame said the bill will not compel priests to testify but only to report abuse.

However, that is not written in the text of the law. Furthermore, a priest would presumably have to reveal the name of a person admitting to the abuse in the confessional in order to alert authorities to what child allegedly might be at risk, as LifeSiteNews previously reported.

Frame’s office did not respond to an inquiry from LifeSiteNews on March 3. LifeSiteNews asked if an attorney had reviewed the legislation for potential religious freedom issues.

Frame previously dismissed religious freedom concerns during a hearing. “I have tried really hard over the last couple of years to find a balance and to strike a careful compromise,” she claiming before saying “sorry” for not being willing to “make a compromise anymore.” She criticized efforts to protect clergy-penitent privilege “in the name of religious freedom.”

Priests are automatically excommunicated if they break the Seal of Confession, according to canon law.

Canon 1386 states, “A confessor (priest) who directly violates the sacramental seal incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; he who does so only indirectly is to be punished according to the gravity of the offence.”

Efforts to force priests to do so, including Montana and Washington this year, have drawn condemnation from Catholic groups as well as several legal experts.

Catholic group calls bill ‘egregious violation’ of First Amendment

“This bill is an egregious violation of the First Amendment, and we can only hope that the courts will waste no time in striking it down,” the Catholic League told LifeSiteNews via email on Tuesday. “Given the political landscape of Washington State, it is, unfortunately, pretty much a done deal.”

Contra the Democrats claims about the bill being just about preventing child abuse, the Catholic League pointed out there are efforts to weaken protections for children, stating:

What is even more galling is that in Washington State they have steps to water down provisions on the public schools to report sexual abuse to parents. Washington State House Bill 1296 seeks to undo much a voter-backed (AND PASSED!) parental rights initiative. In the current legislation, there is a provision to allow public schools to take up to 48 hours before notifying parents if their child is sexually abused. When efforts were made to remove the language that gave schools this ridiculous leeway, the Democrats successfully blocked those efforts. A simple amendment that requires Washington State’s public schools to tell parents right away about crimes committed against their child is too much for the same people supporting an attempt to break the Seal of Confession.

Senators also killed an amendment brought by Republican Senator Phil Fortunato to require school districts to report sexual abuse allegations, and related actions taken, to the state.

“This is, simply, an effort to cause a chilling effect on people of faith,” the Catholic League told LifeSiteNews. “The rabid secularists in Washington State would love nothing more than to marginalize faithful voters who stand in the way of their revolution.”

The law is “impractical,” so the aim must be “to intimidate Catholics and other people of faith.”

“When they specifically take aim on one of the sacraments, they clearly are trying to cause a chilling effect on good Catholics and other people of faith who wish to see public policy that is ordered by traditional morals,” the Catholic League stated.

‘Blatantly unconstitutional,’ legal scholar says

A left-leaning legal expert called the bills in Washington and Montana “blatantly unconstitutional.”

“Putting aside the obvious violation of the sanctity of the confessional, it presents a novel problem for priests if they both encourage the faithful to unburden themselves while at the same time reminding them anything that they say can and will be used against them in a court of law,” Professor Jonathan Turley wrote on his commentary website.

“In my view, the Washington State law is a frontal attack on free exercise and would be struck down if enacted,” the George Washington University law professor wrote.

“The only question is why Democrats consider such legislation to be any more viable politically than it is constitutionally.”

From LifeSiteNews

The emergency ruling comes as 15 Soros-installed AGs seek to block Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from access to information that would reveal how activist groups in blue states have been funded by the U.S. government.

In a stunning and sweeping emergency injunction that has even stunned the people who demanded it, a Manhattan-based district judge has just removed Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent from his authority over the Treasury Department; blocked any political appointee from accessing records within the Treasury Department; blocked any “special appointee” of President Trump from records within Treasury; and demanded that all information previously extracted be destroyed.

The emergency injunction, signed by District Judge Paul Engelmayer in Manhattan, was determined without any input from the Trump administration and applies until Friday, February 14, 2025, when U.S. District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas will hear the full arguments of the lawsuit.

The emergency ruling comes as a result of 15 (Soros-installed) attorneys general from New Jersey, New York, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, Rhode Island, and Vermont all filing suit in New York seeking to block Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from access to information that would reveal how activist groups in their states have been funded by the U.S. government.

READ: Judge blocks Trump plan that would put thousands of USAID staff on paid leave

From Reuters:

The lawsuit said Musk and his team could disrupt federal funding for health clinics, preschools, climate initiatives, and other programs, and that Republican President Donald Trump could use the information to further his political agenda.

DOGE’s access to the system also ‘poses huge cybersecurity risks that put vast amounts of funding for the States and their residents in peril,’ the state attorneys general said. They sought a temporary restraining order blocking DOGE’s access.

The judge, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama, said the states’ claims were ‘particularly strong’ and warranted him acting on their request for emergency relief pending a further hearing before another judge on February 14.

‘That is both because of the risk that the new policy presents of the disclosure of sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking,’ Engelmayer wrote.

New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat whose office is leading the case, welcomed the ruling, saying nobody was above the law and that Americans across the country had been horrified by the DOGE team’s unfettered access to their data.

‘We knew the Trump administration’s choice to give this access to unauthorized individuals was illegal, and this morning, a federal court agreed,’ James said in a statement.

‘Now, Americans can trust that Musk – the world’s richest man – and his friends will not have free rein over their personal information while our lawsuit proceeds.’

Engelmayer’s order bars access from being granted to Treasury Department payment and data systems by political appointees, special government employees and government employees detailed from an agency outside the Treasury Department.

The judge also directed that anyone prohibited under his order from accessing those systems to immediately destroy anything they copied or downloaded.

The order by the judge is transparent judicial activism; it will almost certainly be overturned and nullified by later rulings. However, it creates blocks and slows down the goal of DOGE and the objective of the Trump administration.

On what basis do states think they can sue the federal government to stop the federal government from auditing federal spending? How can a judge block the executive branch from executing the functions of the executive branch? This lawfare activism is ridiculous.

Within the ruling:

… restrained from granting access to any Treasury Department payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees, other than to civil servants with a need for access to perform their job duties within the Bureau of Fiscal Services who have passed all background checks and security clearances and taken all information security training called for in federal statutes and Treasury Department regulations… [Emphasis added.]

So the unelected bureaucracy is in charge and not the secretary of the Treasury?

Reprinted with permission from Conservative Treehouse.