Hey, everybody! If you’re interested, I’m featured in a WaPo piece by @michelleboorstein.bsky.social about online “religion influencers”
www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2026/...
Texas Rep. James Talarico is positioning his candidacy as an effort to break the stranglehold conservatism holds over both American politics and Christianity itself.
www.nytimes.com/2026/03/09/u...
Who is buried in unmarked graves at a cemetery for the family of George Brent, one of Virginia’s earliest settlers?
Researchers from Catholic University and the Arlington Diocese are looking at the site, where slaves once worked.
www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/202...
A government-paid, full-time SWAT team composed of four agents and two vehicles escorts Kash Patel's girlfriend, an arrangement apparently unprecedented in the FBI. Wild reporting.
www.nytimes.com/2026/02/28/u...
NEW: Tucker Carlson, Mike Huckabee debate Israel’s right to land in Middle East
The 2-hour conversation fuels intra-MAGA fight over Israel, as Trump urges Carlson to help tamp it all down
www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2026/...
NEW: US Catholic Bishops conference says of administration's plan to double immigration detention centers:
"The thought of holding thousands of families in massive warehouses should challenge the conscience of every American"
www.usccb.org/news/2026/th...
NEW: US Catholic Bishops conference says of administration's plan to double immigration detention centers:
"The thought of holding thousands of families in massive warehouses should challenge the conscience of every American"
www.usccb.org/news/2026/th...
Tucker Carlson and Mike Huckabee meet today in Israel to "turn down the heat" in the GOP about Israel.
“Trump knows better than anyone the enemy wins when those on the side of God are divided, and division in the GOP has to end," says an organizer
youtu.be/pLnQN28wnrQ
Tucker Carlson and Mike Huckabee meet today in Israel to "turn down the heat" in the GOP about Israel.
“Trump knows better than anyone the enemy wins when those on the side of God are divided, and division in the GOP has to end," says an organizer
x.com/mboorstein/s...
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman wrote in his preliminary injunction, "The court finds that the government has substantially burdened plaintiffs' exercise of religion."
"The vibe is Stonehenge-meets-'The Walking Dead.'"
The hilarious, wise @daniellepaquette.bsky.social on a why there's a wait list to see a bunch of weird, decaying president heads. It's more tender and patriotic than you might think.
www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2026/...
Current state of things: One Fox News host casually declares that Epstein’s money comes from “Jewish billionaires” and a “Jewish banking family,” another responds that he was a “sex rabbi.” www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/jes...
Image text: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION COALITION FOR SPIRITUAL AND ) PUBLIC LEADERSHIP; FR. LARRY ) DOWLING; SR. JEREMEY MIDURA; FR. ) DENNIS BERRY; FR. DAN HARTNETT; and ) MICHAEL N. OKIŃCZYC-CRUZ ) ) Plaintiffs, ) Case No. 25 C 14168 ) v. ) ) Judge Robert W. Gettleman KRISTI NOEM; TODD LYONS; MARCOS ) CHARLES; RUSSELL HOLT; RODNEY S. ) SCOTT; GREGORY BOVINO; PAMELA ) BONDI; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND ) SECURITY; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; ) DONALD J. TRUMP ) ) Defendants. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 8) against defendants, requesting access to minister to migrants and detainees in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) facility in Broadview, Illinois (“Broadview”). Plaintiffs allege that defendants’ denial of their access to Broadview violates plaintiffs’ rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (“RFRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb, et seq., and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (“RLUIPA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000cc, et seq. For the reasons below, the court grants plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 8) in part. A. Standing Because defendants raise the issue, the court briefly addresses standing. Plaintiffs’ theory of standing in relation to its RFRA claim is straightforward. Plaintiffs are asserting their own religious rights and the religious rights of detainees and migrants at Broadview. Defendants do not dispute that plaintiffs have standing to assert their own rights. Instead, defendants argue that “plaintiffs lack standing to assert the rights of the detainees.” Because the preliminary injunction here is based on plaintiffs’ RFRA claims asserted on their own behalf, the court need not reach the third-party standing issues
![Partial Image text:
B. Preliminary injunction
To obtain a preliminary injunction, the plaintiff “must establish that he is likely to
succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary
relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public
interest.” Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). Of these
four factors, “[t]he two most important considerations are likelihood of success on the merits and
irreparable harm.” Bevis v. City of Naperville, Illinois, 85 F.4th 1175, 1188 (7th Cir. 2023). In
establishing a likelihood of success on the merits, the plaintiff “need not demonstrate likelihood
of success by a preponderance of the evidence,” but must “nevertheless make a ‘strong’ showing
that reveals how it proposes to prove its case.” Id. In addition, a plaintiff seeking a preliminary
injunction must show more than “a mere possibility of irreparable harm.” Id.
1. Likelihood of success on the merits
The court finds that plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their
RFRA claim. Under RFRA, the “Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise
of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-
1(a). The statute provides a single exception that applies if the government demonstrates that the application of the burden to the person: “(1) is in is in furtherance of a compelling governmental
interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental
interest.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-1(b); see also Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do
Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418, 430 (2006) (explaining that RFRA adopted a “strict scrutiny test”).
The court finds that the government has substantially burdened plaintiffs’ exercise of
religion.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:7422wlmkminudypjv6cywlzl/bafkreick6pkilnwl6ogeuuudgylh5ouxpl7waic4nqmd5kuhoudztt2mb4)
Partial Image text: B. Preliminary injunction To obtain a preliminary injunction, the plaintiff “must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.” Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). Of these four factors, “[t]he two most important considerations are likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm.” Bevis v. City of Naperville, Illinois, 85 F.4th 1175, 1188 (7th Cir. 2023). In establishing a likelihood of success on the merits, the plaintiff “need not demonstrate likelihood of success by a preponderance of the evidence,” but must “nevertheless make a ‘strong’ showing that reveals how it proposes to prove its case.” Id. In addition, a plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must show more than “a mere possibility of irreparable harm.” Id. 1. Likelihood of success on the merits The court finds that plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their RFRA claim. Under RFRA, the “Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb- 1(a). The statute provides a single exception that applies if the government demonstrates that the application of the burden to the person: “(1) is in is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-1(b); see also Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418, 430 (2006) (explaining that RFRA adopted a “strict scrutiny test”). The court finds that the government has substantially burdened plaintiffs’ exercise of religion.
![Partial image text:
Plaintiffs argue that prayer and ministry to the migrants and detainees at Broadview is an
important religious practice. Defendants concede that “ministering to vulnerable Catholic
immigrants is part of [plaintiffs’] religious exercise,” but argue that doing so at Broadview “is
itself not essential to the practice.”1 RFRA requires a court to analyze if a government practice
substantially burdens a person’s exercise of religion, not whether the religious practice burdened
is “essential.” West v. Radtke, 48 F.4th 836, 845 (7th Cir. 2022) (holding that the assessment of
whether a burden is substantial does not focus on “the centrality of the religious practice in
question”). The Seventh Circuit has “identified three ways plaintiffs can prove that a law or
regulation substantially burdens their religious practice.” Soc’y of Divine Word v. United States Citizenship & Immigr. Servs., 129 F.4th 437, 450 (7th Cir. 2025). Plaintiff can show that the
law or regulation, “(1) compelled them to perform acts undeniably at odds with fundamental
tenets of their religious beliefs, (2) put substantial pressure on them to modify their behavior and
to violate their beliefs, or (3) bears direct, primary, and fundamental responsibility for rendering
a religious exercise effectively impracticable.” Id. (cleaned up). Here, defendants’ denial of
plaintiffs’ access to Broadview satisfies at least the third category. Defendants’ bar on plaintiffs’
visitation to Broadview is fundamentally responsible for rendering plaintiffs’ religious practice
of providing ministry to detainees and migrants effectively impracticable.
Because plaintiffs have shown that defendants have substantially burdened their exercise
of religion, the burden shifts to defendants to show that the burden is in furtherance of a
compelling governmental interest, and that it is the least restrictive means of furthering that
compelling governmental interest.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:7422wlmkminudypjv6cywlzl/bafkreigzeav3gcog7eung3drosx3lsxl6kzxhx6i7kpwgulfe67oohsvoy)
Partial image text: Plaintiffs argue that prayer and ministry to the migrants and detainees at Broadview is an important religious practice. Defendants concede that “ministering to vulnerable Catholic immigrants is part of [plaintiffs’] religious exercise,” but argue that doing so at Broadview “is itself not essential to the practice.”1 RFRA requires a court to analyze if a government practice substantially burdens a person’s exercise of religion, not whether the religious practice burdened is “essential.” West v. Radtke, 48 F.4th 836, 845 (7th Cir. 2022) (holding that the assessment of whether a burden is substantial does not focus on “the centrality of the religious practice in question”). The Seventh Circuit has “identified three ways plaintiffs can prove that a law or regulation substantially burdens their religious practice.” Soc’y of Divine Word v. United States Citizenship & Immigr. Servs., 129 F.4th 437, 450 (7th Cir. 2025). Plaintiff can show that the law or regulation, “(1) compelled them to perform acts undeniably at odds with fundamental tenets of their religious beliefs, (2) put substantial pressure on them to modify their behavior and to violate their beliefs, or (3) bears direct, primary, and fundamental responsibility for rendering a religious exercise effectively impracticable.” Id. (cleaned up). Here, defendants’ denial of plaintiffs’ access to Broadview satisfies at least the third category. Defendants’ bar on plaintiffs’ visitation to Broadview is fundamentally responsible for rendering plaintiffs’ religious practice of providing ministry to detainees and migrants effectively impracticable. Because plaintiffs have shown that defendants have substantially burdened their exercise of religion, the burden shifts to defendants to show that the burden is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest, and that it is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.
Partial image text: 3. Balance of Equities and Public Interest The court agrees with plaintiffs that the balance of equities tips in plaintiffs’ favor. The govt makes no argument about the balance of equities. As plaintiffs note, Broadview allowed plaintiffs’ religious visitation to Broadview for years before reversing course relatively recently. With reasonable notice and communication, addressing legitimate security and safety concerns, allowing plaintiffs to provide pastoral care to migrants and detainees does not pose any undue hardship on the govt. The court also agrees with plaintiffs that the injunction is in public interest. Allowing plaintiffs to provide pastoral care to migrants and detainees will improve the condition of those detained at Broadview. Again, the govt makes no argument about public interest. Consequently, the court finds that the balance of equities tips in plaintiffs’ favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest. *** Having determined that plaintiffs have satisfied the requirements to obtain a preliminary injunction, and taking into consideration the parties’ arguments and representations in today’s hearing, the court grants plaintiffs’ motion in part and orders the following: 1. Defendants are directed to allow plaintiffs to access the Broadview facility on Ash Wednesday, February 18, 2026, to offer ashes and Communion for those who desire it. The parties are directed to meet and confer to establish an appropriate protocol for the purposes of safety and security with regard to the Ash Wednesday services. 3. Based on the parties’ representations during today’s proceedings, the court directs them to meet and confer with regard to plaintiffs’ religious ministry at the Broadview facility after Ash Wednesday, including: (1) personal interactions between plaintiffs and detainees; and (2) the ability of plaintiffs to engage in prayer outside of the Broadview facility and in view of the detainees.
New: District Judge Robert Gettleman issued an order yesterday mandating clergy be allowed inside the Broadview, IL ICE facility on Feb. 18 to offer those inside ashes and communion for Ash Wednesday.
Gettleman found the govt has "substantially burdened plaintiffs’ exercise of religion."
Journalists in New Orleans have no idea how their work lives are about to change for the better. Or maybe they do! Either way, wonderful for everyone involved, @hankstuever.bsky.social especially. www.nola.com/news/veteran...
A 21 year old white nationalist is the one posting white nationalist tweets from the Dep of Labor account. He was rewarded with a promotion.
www.nytimes.com/2026/02/11/u...
The intensity of the US political climate is pushing clergy of all types to consider their public witness. Here's the story of one rabbi
www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2026/...
100s of rabbis, cantors and other Jews outside ICE today protesting the Trump Administration’s immigration actions
All respect and appreciation to the journalists who made today’s front page. Almost all were just fired. 💔
NEW: Vatican quashes rumors Pope Leo was coming to the US in 2026
Me and Anthony Faiola on the careful, strategic path Leo is taking towards his home country
www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2026/...
Before The Washington Post layoffs came down, a group of wealthy D.C. locals approached CEO Will Lewis with a proposal.
@passantino.bsky.social has the details in his Saturday @status.news column: www.status.news/p/washington...
Since our inception, we’ve been beyond fortunate to have the gold standard of sports sections right in our backyard.
Thank you @postsports.bsky.social for your outstanding coverage and so beautifully telling our story.
You will be greatly missed by our organization, our fans and our city.
If Jeff Bezos could afford to spend $75 million on the Melania movie & $500 million for a yacht to sail off to his $55 million wedding to give his wife a $5 million ring, please don't tell me he needed to fire one-third of the Washington Post staff.
Democracy dies in oligarchy.
So sweet! 1600 Notre Dame students (and a buncha priests) held Mass outside at a snow-igloo-chapel a student made ❤️
Love thee, Notre Dame 🎶
Last night, more than 1,600 Notre Dame students braved 19° temps for Mass at St. Olaf’s Chapel, built by Coyle Hall residents from the 38 inches of January snow.
A Catholic bishop in Charlotte called for parishioners to stop using kneelers and altar rails during Holy Communion, saying the modern way is standing for the sacrament.
The reaction was strong.
COME SUPPORT THE WASHINGTON POST!
Rally for a truly important civic institution -- come help save The Post at a crucial moment ✊🏽✊🏽
When: Thursday, February 5th, 12-1 pm
Where: Outside The Post’s D.C. headquarters, 1301 K NW
wbng.org/2026/02/02/s...
Insane @washingtonpost.com reporting:
Under pressure to boost its popularity, Elon Musk’s xAI loosened its guardrails and relaxed controls on sexual content, setting off internal concern.
washingtonpost.com/technology/2... 2/3
From @faizsays.bsky.social @nitasha.bsky.social and Lizzy Dwoskin
How Elon Musk’s bet to hook users turned Grok into a porn generator 3/3
WaPo EXCLUSIVE: While Elon Musk was still working for the govt, employees of his AI start-up xAI received a startling waiver from their employer, asking them to pledge to work with “sensitive, violent, sexual and/or other offensive or disturbing content"
1/3
Kneeling or standing? Tongue or hand?
For traditional Catholics, Charlotte Communion dispute is a battle line
www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2026/...
