The Bishop of Southwark, the Rt Revd Christopher Chessun, was among the speakers who last week expressed further doubts over the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill when it was debated in the House of Lords.

Bishop Chessun raised the prospect of “pressure on all sorts of ancillary staff” who could be “co-opted, either directly or indirectly, into what becomes the final procedure, when the conscience of such an ancillary participant tells them that they should have nothing to do with such a procedure”.

The Bishop pointed out that, when it comes to assisted dying, “matters of acute conscience are not restricted to the immediate preparation of a lethal dosage or the medical oversight of the procedure.”

He went on to ask: “Is it right that they should face sanction or inhibition of their careers, or even dismissal? I suggest not.”

Read it all.

The Bishop of #Southwark, the Rt Revd Christopher Chessun, was among the speakers who last week expressed further doubts over the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill when it was debated in the #HouseofLords ⚖️#Assisteddying #churchhouse #churchnews https://t.co/F3cCOzkoxB

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) March 31, 2026

The Anglican Church in North America has chosen to retain Lathrop GPM to conduct a restricted and nontransparent review of the Title IV proceedings surrounding Bishop Stewart Ruch, and in that choice the truth of the matter is already disclosed, not at the end of the process but at its beginning. The terms will not be released. The findings are not promised to the light. The scope has been drawn with a care that ensures the most decisive questions will never quite arrive where they must be answered. One need not wait for conclusions. The arrangement itself speaks with sufficient clarity.

What presents itself as sober inquiry carries the unmistakable grammar of preemption. There will be interviews, reports, careful language, and the appearance of discipline, yet all of it unfolds within limits that have already been secured against the possibility that the truth might actually do what truth does, which is to judge, to expose, and to reorder. The structure is not neutral. It is already an answer. It ensures that whatever is said will be said in a way that does not require the institution to become something other than what it presently is.

The choice of Lathrop GPM makes this plain in a way that no further argument can improve. A firm known for defending institutions against claims of abuse has been entrusted with examining an institution under precisely such a shadow. One might search for a more transparent declaration of intent and fail to find it. This is not a tension to be resolved. It is a coherence to be recognized. The task is not to discover a truth that might unsettle the body under examination but to render events intelligible within a horizon that preserves that body’s continuity. While the conclusion has not been written in detail, its boundaries have been drawn with precision.

Even the most modest traditions of law would find this intolerable. The idea that judgment must be free from the control of those who stand to be implicated is not an advanced refinement. It is the bare minimum required for justice to exist at all. 

Read it all.

Re: Ruch trial aftermath: The Ex. Committee has appointed a subcommittee to "oversee a third-party review of the provincial administration" of the Ruch matter. They have not yet determined the scope of the review but will "retain a qualified firm or individual to complete it." pic.twitter.com/U1CXTUnENM

— Arlie Coles (@ArlieColes) January 17, 2026

The province’s intent to exclude the trial court’s processes from the coming review represents a source of “deep concerns” for the Anglicans for Truth, Renewal, and Accountability (ATRA), a grassroots group formed in 2025. A December open letter issued by ATRA, which gathered over 200 clergy and lay signatures, called for an independent post-trial review with a clear scope and a promise of eventual publication.

In a March 25 statement, ATRA echoed the Diocese of South Carolina in calling for the Executive Committee to publish its contract with Lathrop GPM “to answer some important remaining questions.”

“Who will have control over the final report? Will the final report be made public? Does the firm hired have a fiduciary duty to the Province, meaning ‘a legal duty to act solely in another party’s interests,’ which constrains the firm’s ability to pursue truth independently? Who will have access to and control over the information gathered by the firm?” the ATRA statement asked.

According to Harris, the province intends to publicize the findings of the report, though has not determined in what format. It does not intend to publish its contract with Lathrop.

ACNAtoo, the advocacy group formed in 2021 in response to allegations of abuse in Bishop Ruch’s diocese, criticized the denomination’s choice of Lathrop to conduct the review. The group called Lathrop’s participation “inappropriate” in light of the firm’s “deficiencies” in investigating sexual misconduct allegations against Mike Bickle, former leader of the International House of Prayer in Kansas City; its legal defense of Roman Catholic bishops and dioceses in civil sexual assault cases; and its use of “scorched earth” tactics against victims described by the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests.

Roes, VandeHei, and Price also stated concern to TLC regarding Lathrop’s “track record of defending religious institutions in sexual abuse lawsuits,” and expressed a desire for those overseeing the post-trial review to work to earn the confidence of the church’s members.

Read it all.

New for @Livng_Church: Lathrop will review the process that ended in a controversial acquittal of Bp Stewart Ruch, but the court record of the ACNA's chaotic trial will remain under wraps.https://t.co/kFRSWZZjbx

— Arlie Coles (@ArlieColes) March 27, 2026

An arson attack on Jewish charity-owned ambulances in north London is being treated as an antisemitic hate crime and is being investigated by counter-terror officers, the Metropolitan Police has said.

Four Hatzola ambulances were set ablaze in Golders Green in the early hours of Monday, causing several explosions – caused by gas canisters onboard the vehicles.

No arrests have been made but CCTV, which appears to show three suspects dressed in black setting fire to an ambulance, is being investigated.

Det Ch Supt Luke Williams said the attack had not been declared a terror incident “at this stage”.

Read it all.

In a surprising move, the Scottish Parliament this week voted to reject assisted suicide. And it wasn’t even close – 57 for and 69 against, with every party except the Lib Dems and the Greens having a majority voting against. Why did this happen? Especially when at the first two stages of the bill it comfortably passed. 

And therein lies the answer. As MSPs got to look more closely at what was involved, they realised that the bill itself was badly worded and had insurmountable difficulties – like compelling staff and organisations who did not want to participate in ‘mercy killing’ to do so.  

Like the threat of people feeling coerced. The bill would have made the treatment available to terminally ill, mentally competent adults who have been given less than six months to live – but opponents said there were not enough protections against coercion.  

Like the government admitting that money would have to be taken from other frontline NHS services to provide for assisted suicide.  The irony of taking money from the sick in order to kill people was not lost on some MSPs. 

Read it all.

The Scottish parliament has rejected a bill that would have seen the country introduce assisted suicide, in what is the latest victory for the vulnerable the world over in recent weeks, writes JASON OSBORNEhttps://t.co/PdDInXhp1z

— gript (@griptmedia) March 19, 2026

The Scottish Parliament’s rejection of a Bill to legalise assisted dying has been welcomed by the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, the Rt Revd Rosie Frew, and by Christian campaigners in the country.

On Tuesday evening, Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) rejected, by 69 votes to 57, the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill, which had been introduced by Liam McArthur MSP. The Bill sought to allow an assisted death for terminally ill adults who had decision-making capacity and had six months or less to live.

In a statement issued shortly after the vote, Ms Frew said: “I recognise that the outcome will be a disappointment to many, but it was clear that the safeguards included did not offer sufficient protection.

“We have been consistent in our position that we need to prioritise the development of excellent palliative care services that are universally available and fully funded. Without that, had the Bill passed, we would fear that many vulnerable people might have seen an assisted death as their only realistic option.”

Read it all.

The Scottish Parliament’s rejection of a Bill to legalise assisted dying has been welcomed by the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, the Rt Revd Rosie Frew, and by Christian campaigners in the country#churchnews #churchtimes https://t.co/NhNTeIZ6GR

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) March 18, 2026

In my lifetime, American society has been transformed by widespread accommodation of vice. Marijuana has been legalized in many jurisdictions, as has addictive online gambling. Not surprisingly, pot use and regular gambling have increased. In 2025, 17 percent of adults report smoking pot daily, up from 8 percent in 2020. Less than a decade ago, nobody had a sports betting app on his smartphone; today, half of American men between eighteen and forty-nine have opened accounts. And pornography is readily available on the internet, protected as free speech by the Supreme Court.

Social norms have likewise shifted. Open use of ­illegal drugs is widely tolerated. Silicon Valley titans use ketamine and other substances, making a mockery of the restriction of these drugs to medical use only. The New Yorker publishes essays cheering “throuples” and other sexual arrangements. Activists campaign to remove the stigma from “sex work,” which few local governments make efforts to prevent. 

Writing in National Affairs (“The Case for Prohibiting Vice”), Charles Fain Lehman observes that social conservatives have been routed in recent decades. Large-scale social trends run against us. But Lehman thinks we share some of the blame. Too often, those who wish to sustain moral codes accept the dominant terms of public debate, which rest on the notion that people should be free to do as they wish in their private lives, as long as nobody else is harmed….

Lehman advises social conservatives to stop trying to shoehorn their moral judgments into liberal arguments that rest on proofs of harm. We need to talk more frankly about what it means to have a good society, one that promotes human flourishing. And we should not shy away from the obvious truth that a good society discourages vice because it is vicious.

Read it all.

“For most of American history, a libertarianism in private life, restrained only by the harm principle, did not hold sway. American constitutional law accords ‘police power’ to the states, allowing them to pass laws to protect and promote the health, safety, and morals of their… https://t.co/jvv02FoYXU

— First Things (@firstthingsmag) March 10, 2026

The BBC reported on Monday that 100 Labour MPs had written to the Prime Minister arguing that, if assisted dying legislation does not pass, trust in politics will be undermined.

But the Labour MP Jessica Asato, who opposes the Bill, told the BBC: “The sponsor of the Bill has rejected 99 per cent of suggested improvements and amendments in the House of Lords and so it still contains all the same faults and issues. Any MP that voted to push this Bill through would do so knowing that it is unsafe and would harm vulnerable people.”

A new Whitestone poll of more than 2000 UK adults for Care Not Killing shows that the public wants Parliament to prioritise safety over choice.

Asked if they would support a law that enabled patient choice, but was implemented in a way that put other patients and vulnerable people at risk, respondents opposed the move by 42 per cent to 35 per cent. The proportion of those who “strongly” backed putting safety over choice was more than double the proportion of those who said the opposite (26 per cent to 12 per cent).

Read it all.

As the assisted-dying Bill runs out of debating time in the House of Lords, the Christian Labour peer Lord Rook on Friday tabled three amendments on protecting vulnerable people from coercion and safeguarding young people#HouseofLords #debate https://t.co/2Q3MhOVc5N

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) March 16, 2026

The Bishops’ Conference said it strongly disagrees with the Government’s position, noting that every organization has guiding values that shape its mission and practice.

“For many faith‑based organizations, including Catholic hospices and care homes, these values are fundamentally incompatible with the introduction of assisted suicide,” said Bishop John Keenan of Paisley, the President of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland.

“The Bishops’ Conference maintains that no organization should be compelled by the State to participate in the deliberate ending of life when doing so would violate its ethical or religious principles,” the bishop said.

Anthony Horan, the Director of the Scottish Catholic Parliamentary Office, said the Scottish Government and Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) must accept that Catholic hospices and care homes cannot, in good conscience, provide any services under the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill, nor can they be expected to refer anyone to such services.

“Assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the Gospel,” he told Crux Now.

Read it all.

Ahead of a key vote, the bishops of Scotland, along with pro-life leaders, have made a passionate plea to politicians to reject a proposed assisted suicide bill because it is “unsafe.” https://t.co/Jl3aGGoLhL

— Catholic News Agency (@cnalive) March 6, 2026

The Rt. Rev. Julian Dobbs, acting archbishop of the Anglican Church in North America, has sued the Rt. Rev. Derek Jones, former head of the denomination’s chaplaincy jurisdiction, in federal court for defamation.

Bishop Dobbs’ lawsuit was filed on February 17 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama and claims that Bishop Jones repeatedly made false public statements about Dobbs’ previous handling of two financial matters.

Jones and his independent chaplaincy jurisdiction, which announced its departure from the ACNA last September, allegedly “knew or recklessly ignored” that investigations into the two matters had found no wrongdoing by Dobbs, but made the statements anyway, according to the filing.

“Defendants have made these false assertions repeatedly in the public record … in an all-out campaign to make the community, especially the Anglican faithful in North America and abroad, view Bishop Dobbs and other leaders within the ACNA (and, of course, by extension the ACNA) with disdain and disassociate from them,” the filing said.

Read it all.

New for @Livng_Church: Acting ACNA primate Dobbs sues former chaplaincy bishop Derek Jones for defamation, accusing him of making repeated false statements about Dobbs' handling of two financial matters. https://t.co/ZgxWlO73eE

— Arlie Coles (@ArlieColes) March 3, 2026

Assisted suicide campaigners have repeatedly claimed that just seven Peers have been blocking the Bill by tabling lots of amendments.

A new analysis by Right To Life UK’s Public Affairs team has, however, confirmed that this spin from assisted suicide campaigners paints a deeply misleading picture of the actual situation in the House of Lords.

The analysis shows that nearly 80 Peers have so far tabled or signed amendments highlighting concerns with the Bill and that 131 Peers have either spoken against the Bill or signed amendments raising such concerns during its passage through the Lords.

This is significant because Bill supporters are seemingly attempting to persuade MPs to revive the Bill in the next parliamentary session and force it through using the Parliament Acts, on the basis that a small number of Peers have inappropriately blocked its passage. Our analysis shows this claim to be wholly untrue.

131 is an exceptionally high number of Peers opposing a Bill, particularly one where debates are reserved for Fridays when Peers are often not expected to be in Parliament. It is even more remarkable given that the Bill has not yet completed Committee Stage or reached its Report Stage or Third Reading. In addition to these 131 Peers, it is likely that more Peers will speak out during future sittings and it is known that many more Peers are opposed to the Bill. Others have already spoken out in the media or expressed concerns via written parliamentary questions.

Read it all.

BREAKING: UK Bill to Legalize Assisted Suicide Fails After Massive Opposition https://t.co/rSU7BExTq4 pic.twitter.com/XyZHW46dcu

— LifeNews.com (@LifeNewsHQ) February 26, 2026

The Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision on Friday wiping out a chunk of President Donald Trump’s tariff regime is a triumph for the Constitution’s separation of powers and the individual liberty that it protects.

The decision by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. says nothing about whether the tariffs are good or bad policy. But it recognizes that they are a major tax, and that raising revenue is a “distinct” power that belongs to Congress. There’s a reason the 18th century American revolutionary slogan was “no taxation without representation.” Taxing citizens without consent from their elected representatives is antithetical to the American project.

Congress never approved the worldwide tariffs at issue in the case. Trump told the court they were authorized by a 1977 law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. No president has used IEEPA to impose tariffs, but it contains the phrase “regulate … importation.” Trump said that was sufficient authorization for him to throw out the rest of the tariff schedules and set import taxes however he pleased.

Roberts saw the flimsiness of that reasoning. “Based on two words separated by 16 others,” he wrote, “the President asserts the independent power to impose tariffs on imports from any country, of any product, at any rate, for any amount of time. Those words cannot bear such weight.” Indeed. The executive branch can’t be allowed to grab hundreds of billions of dollars from the American people on such a thin legal basis.

Read it all.

The Supreme Court’s decision to invalidate the Trump administration’s broad tariffs strips the president of a central instrument of his foreign policy, undercutting his ability to coerce global leaders and reshape world order in his second term.https://t.co/mktSe8eQIw

Starting with the 2024 decision that gave President Trump substantial immunity from prosecution and continuing through a score of emergency orders provisionally greenlighting an array of his second-term initiatives, Mr. Trump has had an extraordinarily successful run before the Supreme Court.

That came to a sudden, jolting halt on Friday, when Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for six members of the court, roundly rejected Mr. Trump’s signature tariffs program. It was the Supreme Court’s first merits ruling — a final judgment on the lawfulness of an executive action — on an element of the administration’s second-term agenda. It amounted to a declaration of independence.

It also served as another in a series of clashes between the leaders of two branches of the federal government cut from very different cloth: the controlled, cerebral chief justice and the biting, brazen president.

Read it all.

The Supreme Court’s Declaration of Independence https://t.co/c3j3a7tlnQ via @NYTimes

— Luba Howard 🇺🇦 (@marynlm) February 20, 2026

It’s hard to recall a regulator who has done as much damage to medical innovation in as little time as Vinay Prasad. In his latest drive-by shooting, the leader of the Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine division rejected Moderna’s mRNA flu vaccine without even a cursory review. This is arbitrary government at its worst.

The FDA rarely refuses to review a drug or vaccine application. Our sources say the FDA has rejected only about 4% of applications without a review, typically when they are missing important information. That wasn’t the case with Moderna.

Dr. Prasad spiked Moderna’s flu vaccine because its Phase 3 trial was putatively not “adequate and well-controlled.” He quibbled that the control group in Moderna’s late-stage trial didn’t receive the “best-available standard of care.” He decides what is “best.”

Moderna launched a global randomized controlled trial in September 2024 with 41,000 participants, half of whom received its vaccine. The other half received a standard flu vaccine as a control. The FDA blessed its trial design, and agency staffers gave Moderna a thumbs up to apply for approval last August based on the results. Its vaccine was 27% more effective at preventing symptomatic cases of flu and 49% more effective against hospitalization than the standard flu vaccine.

Read it all.

The WSJ Editorial Board weighs in:
“It’s hard to recall a regulator who has done as much damage to medical innovation in as little time as Vinay Prasad. In his latest drive-by shooting, the leader of the Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine division rejected Moderna ’s mRNA flu…

— Amy Siskind 🏳️‍🌈 (@Amy_Siskind) February 13, 2026

[Fox] Varian, who adopted the name Fox at 18 and is now 22, is one of thousands of minors who underwent gender-transition surgery over the past decade. And she is just one of the young people who have come to regret permanently addressing what was only a temporary identity shift.

Three years after her mastectomy, Varian stopped identifying as transgender and began a process known as detransitioning. In May 2023, she filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the two principal Westchester County, New York, care providers who oversaw her gender transition: her longtime psychologist, Kenneth Einhorn, and Dr. Simon Chin, who performed the mastectomy.

On Friday, a jury in White Plains, New York, awarded Varian $2 million in damages. Varian’s case is the first malpractice suit from a detransitioner to go before a jury, and I was the only reporter to attend the entire three-week trial. Represented by personal-injury attorney Adam Deutsch, Varian said she had been injured by the defendants due to their deviation from standard practices and a lack of informed consent. While there are no guarantees in medical malpractice lawsuits, legal experts believe Varian’s victory could inspire a wave of similar cases that would significantly disrupt pediatric gender medicine.

The trial was anchored by emotional testimony from Varian and her mother, Claire Deacon. Varian testified that Einhorn served as an enabler, repeatedly assuring her that the mastectomy she desired would greatly improve her well-being. Deacon testified that Einhorn browbeat her into consenting to her daughter’s surgery, threatening that she would otherwise commit suicide. 

Read it all.

A Legal First That Could Change Gender Medicine by @benryanwriter https://t.co/yAv9DOK6c9

— The Free Press (@TheFP) February 5, 2026

Campaigners in favour of medically assisted suicide in England, Scotland and France have apparently suffered setbacks that could ensure the controversial practice never comes into law.

A recent report by The Guardian suggested that the Westminster bill, put forward by Labour’s Kim Leadbeater, will likely never come to a final vote and so will fail by default.

Both sides of the debate have accused the other of using underhand tactics to get their way. Proponents of assisted suicide claim the other side has used procedural delaying tactics in the Lords to ensure the bill never becomes law.

Pro-life campaigners have pointed out that the government, which is officially neutral on the issue, has apparently been favouring the pro-suicide position with its actions. It has also been pointed out that extra scrutiny of a bill that would give state institutions the power of life and death merits additional scrutiny and care.

Labour MP Florence Eshalomi told the Guardian, “Not a single royal college, professional body or cabinet minister will attest to the safety of this bill. Scrutiny should never be conflated with obstruction and it would be reckless for Lords to ignore the concerns of such a wide range of experts.”

Read it all.

(Christian Today) 'Campaigners in favour of medically assisted suicide in #England, #Scotland and #France have apparently suffered setbacks that could ensure the controversial practice never comes into law.

A recent report by The Guardian suggested that the Westminster bill, put…

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) January 27, 2026

[Audrey] Luhmann said the report by Husch Blackwell found Ruch sent emails attempting to coordinate legal representation for Rivera and authorized the priest at Rivera’s church to ask the victim’s family about dropping charges against Rivera, but specifying it should be done without pressure. But the court, which assigned minimal weight to that report, describes Ruch’s decisions at the time as “pastoral judgment exercised in real time, without the benefit of hindsight.”

The order also acknowledged that Ruch ordained Presbyterian Pastor Joshua Moon to the priesthood in 2020, despite knowing that Moon previously pleaded guilty to and served a 90-day sentence for attempting to solicit a prostitute. Ruch installed Moon as rector of a church plant, where Moon was later suspended from pastoral ministry for life after a female deacon reported him for making an unwanted sexual advance. The female deacon told The Washington Post that Ruch chastised her for being alone with Moon.

“The outcome of Moon’s ministry, while grievous and contrary to the hopes invested in him, does not negate the thoughtful, conscientious, and vigilant approach Bishop Ruch employed with the information available at the time,” the court wrote.

A person who assisted the prosecution acknowledged that whether the evidence against Ruch met the clear and convincing threshold for conviction was a legitimate question but said it was incorrect to claim there was no evidence. The source asked to be referred to anonymously due to concerns about negative repercussions.

“They should have seen a pattern of failing to properly vet and have accountability for these leaders in his diocese,” the person said. They also said fear of retribution and lack of legal authority in the church court to subpoena witnesses or materials created barriers for calling witnesses; The Living Church reported that other witnesses disputed the court’s characterization of their knowledge of Ruch’s conduct.

Read it all.

As the denomination looks ahead to two additional bishops’ trials, the precedents set by the Ruch trial will have substantial bearing on the upcoming proceedings. https://t.co/zHTGehgzWj

— RNS (@RNS) January 24, 2026

Its advocates cannot be allowed to act as if the Leadbeater Bill is a done deal

“In extreme cases I would be willing to kill a patient to help them escape unbearable suffering, if they had come to that decision after serious consideration,” says a colleague of mine, in the windowless, unventilated cupboard that serves as a doctors’ office, “But there is no way in hell that the NHS can be trusted with such a role.”

Those who deal with life and death each day recognise that giving patients lethal drugs to end their life is active killing, not passive dying. I happen to think that we should not kill ourselves or others. My colleague takes a different view on the principle. But we don’t shy away from what it is we are actually discussing, so our conversation benefits from a lot more clarity than when politicians emotionalised and euphemised to limp Kim Leadbeater’s assisted suicide bill through the Commons.

We discuss the systemic chaos that we see affecting patients every day, and imagine what the effects of introducing a new therapeutic option of being killed would be. US-style privatised medicine has a perverse incentive to keep the patient alive with increasingly extreme and expensive (but ultimately futile) interventions — a quarter of all Americans die in intensive care. 

UK-style socialised medicine has an equal and opposite perverse incentive to reduce the number of patients, especially in times of crisis. And the NHS is broken, as everyone from government to general practice states openly.

Facilitating the suicide of privileged elites who are used to having things their way and see their mode of death as a final opportunity for exercising autonomy is one matter, but if that requires suicide to be offered to all of our patients, including the vulnerable, the lonely, and the abused, the real cost appears to outweigh any idealised benefits. How do we tell a homeless patient with a new metastatic cancer diagnosis that they could wait months for a nursing home placement, or they could be scheduled for an assisted suicide in as little as nine days, without it sounding like a tacit recommendation?

Read it all.

Advocates of assisted dying cannot be allowed to act as if the Leadbeater Bill is a done deal, argues @TradSkowronski https://t.co/YPaIjSA0TL

— The Critic (@TheCriticMag) January 21, 2026

Updates from the Court for the Trial of a Bishop 

The College received an update on the Court for the Trial of a Bishop, which held an organizational meeting earlier this month to consider all recusals in the disciplinary matters of Archbishop Steve Wood and Bishop Derek Jones. Elizabeth Medley, Esq. of Tallahassee, Florida, has been appointed to serve as the Provincial Prosecutor. Bishop David Bryan, acting Bishop Ordinary of the Diocese of the Carolinas, has recused himself from the Wood matter, and Bishop Ryan Reed has succeeded him as President of the Court.  Ms. Katie Grosskopf, Esq., will serve as its Presiding Officer. The Court has indicated it is considering plans to hold proceedings for both cases concurrently.  It will host an orientation session for all members of the Court later this month to establish its communications protocols and create a plan for moving forward….

Post Ruch Trial Review 

Following the College of Bishops meeting, the Executive Committee met on Friday afternoon and appointed a Subcommittee to oversee a third-party review of the provincial administration of disciplinary matters pertaining to Bishop Stewart Ruch. The committee includes: Bishop Mark Engel, Bishop Ordinary of the Anglican Diocese of the Great Lakes (Chairman), The Rev. Canon Dr. Keith Allen, Rector of Christ Church Vero Beach in the Gulf Atlantic Diocese and member of the Executive Committee, Mrs. Sarah Kwolek, Director of Administration and Diocesan Treasurer for the Diocese of Pittsburgh and member of the Executive Committee, and Mrs. Kellie Moy, lay member at Church of the Good Shepherd in the Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic. This subcommittee will meet soon to determine the final scope of the review and retain a qualified firm or individual to complete it.

Read it all.

ACNA NEWS: A press release has been issued in the wake of the College of Bishops' meeting that features lots of news about disciplinary matters in the church. 🧵to walk through them: pic.twitter.com/wBFqnsZP74

— Arlie Coles (@ArlieColes) January 17, 2026

A sprawling betting scheme to rig NCAA and Chinese Basketball Association games ensnared 26 people, including more than a dozen college basketball players who tried to fix games as recently as last season, federal prosecutors said Thursday.

The scheme generally revolved around fixers recruiting players with the promise of a big payment in exchange for purposefully underperforming during a game, prosecutors said. The fixers would then place big bets against the players’ teams in those games, defrauding sportsbooks and other bettors, authorities said.

Concerns about gambling and college sports have grown since 2018, when the US Supreme Court struck down a federal ban on the practice, leading some states to legalize it to varying degrees. The NCAA does not allow athletes or staff to bet on college games, but it briefly allowed student-athletes to bet on professional sports last year before rescinding that decision in November.

According to the indictment unsealed Thursday, fixers started with two games in the Chinese Basketball Association in 2023 and, successful there, moved on to rigging NCAA games as recently as January 2025.

Read it all.

Sports bettors worked with dozens of players across NCAA men’s basketball to rig at least 29 games, federal prosecutors alleged in an indictment Thursday⁰
The athletes played for schools
including Tulane, St. Louis University, DePaul, Fordham and more https://t.co/7h0C3cl174

— Jonathan Lemire (@JonLemire) January 15, 2026

One major reason for the proposed changes is the radical upsurge of antisemitic attacks in Canada. According to B’nai Brith Canada’s “Annual Audit of Antisemitic Incidents in Canada,” ntisemitic incidents rose 124 percent from 2022 to 2024.

“Since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks in Israel, Jewish institutions in Canada have faced unprecedented threats, such as shootings, arson and bomb threats,” the report added.  

But what are called “hate” laws frequently violate freedom of speech, of the press, and of religion. They also tend to be vague and, hence, their scope expands and governments use them to punish views that they simply do not like. Moreover, in free societies, they do not reduce extremist activity.

In addition, as the Canadian Constitution Foundation argues: “Bill C-9 would … remove safeguards against politically motivated charges, remove political accountability for charges, would create a risk of overcharging to force plea bargains, expand the availability of hate offences beyond the criminal law, and risks limiting constitutionally protected protest activity.”

Even if one were to accept the necessity of such laws, sections 318 and 319 of the criminal code already ban advocating genocide and the willful promotion of hatred against an identifiable group.

Read it all.

Canada’s Bill C-9 And The Growing Threat To Religious Freedom @drpaulmarshall https://t.co/ear0ALDqsE

— Baylor ISR (@BaylorISR) December 24, 2025

The court also assigned minimal weight to the testimony of two prosecution witnesses, stating they “had not participated in diocesan leadership” and “possessed no firsthand knowledge” of Bishop Ruch’s conduct. 

Speaking with The Living Church, both witnesses disputed this characterization. The first witness served for almost two years on the diocese’s standing committee and two of its subcommittees, and the second witness led in creating a deanery child protection policy, then served on a diocesan task force to create its first protective standards in the aftermath of the Rivera disclosure.

“The [court decision] states again and again that too much of the testimony on the prosecution side was secondhand, based on emotion or opinion rather than on firsthand experience,” the first witness told TLC. “First of all, that’s false, and second of all, it’s really offensive to see misrepresentations of one’s service in the official record.”

“The court’s description of the development of safeguarding in the [Upper Midwest] does not comport with my experience as a Pastor to Children and Families in the diocese for nearly two decades,” the second witness added.

Ruch’s defense witnesses included five bishops, who testified that Ruch acted “in accordance with safeguarding expectations” and did not exhibit “patterns of neglect or inattentiveness.” 

A series of priests, deacons, and laypeople from the diocese also testified, persuading the court with respect to the charge that Ruch habitually promoted abusive ministers – some of whose backgrounds included solicitation of a prostitute and second-degree attempted murder, and some of whom reoffended – was not negligence but “difficult and imperfect work of assisting fallen men and women who sought vocational calling” that Ruch undertook with sincerity.

Read it all.

New for @Livng_Church: The ACNA court's ruling in the matter of Bp Stewart Ruch, its first ever acquittal, followed a decision to set aside two of three independent investigations and to admit additional evidence. https://t.co/YMgjiZQkOH

— Arlie Coles (@ArlieColes) December 19, 2025

‘We are aware that an assessment such as we request raises practical questions and anxiety about what might be revealed. We ask you to remember alongside us that, in the words of our Lord, “there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open” [Luke 8:17]’.

Read it all.

Out of love for the church and concern over the crisis, scandal, and abuse; we call for a fully independent, third-party assessment in the ACNA.
We invite all current or former ACNA clergy and laity to read and sign our open letter: https://t.co/NFEbBmH7p6

— anglicanrenewal (@anglicanrenewal) December 17, 2025

Read it all.

The decision in the trial of Bp Stewart Ruch, of ACNA's Diocese of the Upper Midwest, is out: Ruch has been found not guilty on all charges from the presentment. pic.twitter.com/prXLkZCtDf

— Arlie Coles (@ArlieColes) December 16, 2025

More than a thousand people gathered at Bondi Beach in Sydney on December 14th, the first night of Hannukah, to watch the lighting of a menorah. Children wearing face paint crowded a petting zoo. Families held balloons and bubble wands. Yet as the sun began to dip, two men dressed in black and wielding long-barrelled firearms shot into the crowd from positions just outside the beach-side park where the event was taking place. They murdered at least 15 people and injured dozens more, including two police officers.

Anthony Albanese, Australia’s prime minister, confirmed the massacre was a “targeted attack on Jewish Australians”. He labelled the attack “a terrorist incident”; that designation gives authorities additional powers to question and detain suspects. The dead include Eli Schlanger, a prominent local rabbi and the organiser of the event.

Listen to this story

AI Narrated

MORE THAN a thousand people gathered at Bondi Beach in Sydney on December 14th, the first night of Hannukah, to watch the lighting of a menorah. Children wearing face paint crowded a petting zoo. Families held balloons and bubble wands. Yet as the sun began to dip, two men dressed in black and wielding long-barrelled firearms shot into the crowd from positions just outside the beach-side park where the event was taking place. They murdered at least 15 people and injured dozens more, including two police officers.

Anthony Albanese, Australia’s prime minister, confirmed the massacre was a “targeted attack on Jewish Australians”. He labelled the attack “a terrorist incident”; that designation gives authorities additional powers to question and detain suspects. The dead include Eli Schlanger, a prominent local rabbi and the organiser of the event.

The attack is one of the worst shootings in modern Australian history, even if the final toll will take some days to come clear. And but for the immense courage of bystanders, it might have been even more lethal. One video shows a man in a white T-shirt creeping up on one of the gunmen from behind a car, then wrestling the attacker’s rifle away from him. “That man is a genuine hero,” said Chris Minns, the premier of New South Wales. “I’ve got no doubt that there are many, many people alive tonight as a result of his bravery.”

Read it all.

The attack is one of the worst shootings in modern Australian history, even if the final toll will take some days to come clear. And but for the immense courage of bystanders, it might have been even more lethal https://t.co/3PxXmMvLYN

Photo: AFP via Getty Images pic.twitter.com/OpyEkjiKcn

— The Economist (@TheEconomist) December 14, 2025

Is the billable hour about to become a thing of the past?

It seems inevitable, at least for lawyers and other professional-services firms, because as artificial-intelligence capabilities accelerate, the fundamental logic of charging for time spent rather than value delivered is becoming increasingly untenable.

The billable hour as the fundamental unit of business for professional services is so
widespread that it’s difficult to remember that it is a fairly recent innovation, becoming prevalent in the 1960s and 1970s. Before that, many lawyers and other professionals billed for outcomes achieved or services rendered, not for time.

Many say the seed for the billable hour was planted in the early 1900s by a young lawyer named Reginald Heber Smith, who implemented a time-tracking system for lawyers during his tenure as counsel to the Boston Legal Aid Society, which provided legal services to the poor. He wanted lawyers to track how they were spending their time, not for billing purposes but to find ways to improve the efficiency of the team, which had a limited budget….

Read it all.

Could AI make billable hours obsolete?https://t.co/E0lvwETo3p

"Widespread AI adoption could render the billable hour obsolete, a business expert argued. Lawyers, public relations pros, and consultants are outsourcing more work to bots, so the logic of charging for time —… pic.twitter.com/nEok6qU1v2

— Bob Pickard (@BobPickard) December 5, 2025

President Trump’s global tariffs ran headlong into a skeptical Supreme Court on Wednesday, with justices across the spectrum expressing doubt that a 1970s emergency-powers law could be read to provide the president unilateral authority to remake the international economy and collect billions of dollars in import taxes without explicit congressional approval.

But even if the court strikes down the tariffs Trump initiated on his self-declared Liberation Day last April, the justices gave little indication how they might unwind the president’s signature economic policy and favorite diplomatic tool. That left unclear whether previously paid duties would be refunded or whether Congress could be invited to step in, perhaps by ratifying the levies retroactively.

“It seems to me like it could be a mess,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett said during the later stages of an oral argument that ran nearly three hours.

Solicitor General John Sauer took heat from all sides as he pressed the administration’s argument: that the president’s power to regulate foreign financial transactions when he declares an emergency includes the authority to impose tariffs. Tariffs were taxes, a majority of justices agreed, and many were dubious that Congress would so casually surrender to the executive its core constitutional power to raise revenue.

“The Constitution is structured so that if I’m going to be asked to pay for something as a citizen, that it’s through a bill that is generated through Congress,” said Justice Sonia Sotomayor. “But I’m not going to be taxed unless both houses” of Congress and the president “have made that choice.”

Read it all.

And that is a wrap on the SCOTUS arguments.

After that argument, if I were the Trump Administration, I'd be burning the midnight oil over the next couple of weeks drawing up tariff backup plans. A clear majority of the Justices appeared skeptical that IEEPA authorizes the type…

— Peter Harrell (@petereharrell) November 5, 2025

On March 23, 2023, an N.B.A. player left a game in New Orleans after playing just 10 minutes. His team said the player, Terry Rozier, was experiencing “foot discomfort.”

But according to federal prosecutors, Mr. Rozier’s departure was a key moment in an insider-trading scheme. Before the game, they say, Mr. Rozier had informed his childhood friend Deniro Laster that he would be exiting the game early, so that Mr. Laster and others could bet hundreds of thousands of dollars on his underperformance for the Charlotte Hornets.

On Thursday morning, Mr. Rozier was arrested in Orlando, Fla., and charged with wire fraud and money laundering conspiracy. He was one of dozens of people — including Chauncey Billups, the head coach of the Portland Trail Blazers — named in two indictments aimed at illegal gambling.

The charges spanned the worlds of professional sports, Mafia families and online betting, pairing traditional smoky-room card cheating with corruption enabled by today’s ubiquitous betting apps and smartphones. Each indictment described schemes that the authorities said had defrauded gamblers; one cast doubt on the integrity of N.B.A. games.

Read it all.

(NYT front page) More than 30 people were indicted on Thursday in a case involving insider bets on basketball games and poker games rigged by Mafia families https://t.co/vBLHICaKhb #sports #gambling #basketball #culturewatch #usa #law #ethics #scandal #corruption #money #greed

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) October 24, 2025

In a statement to The Times, a spokesperson for the EHRC said: “This topic raises complex issues relevant to equality and human rights, and therefore our regulatory remit given the EHRC’s statutory powers and duties. As such, we have provided advice to the chair of the working group and the secretary of state for housing, communities and local government and stand ready to continue to do so.

“Legal protections against discrimination and hate crime already exist, so it is unclear what role a new definition would play in addressing discrimination and abuse targeted at Muslims. An official non-statutory definition risks being in conflict with existing legal definitions and provisions, resulting in inconsistency and potential confusion for courts and individuals.

“Should government proceed with adoption of a definition, we advise that this should be subject to a full public consultation so that all the potential risks and benefits can be considered.”

A spokesperson for the communities department said that a full consultation was not necessary under the law.

Read it all (requires subscription).

Islamophobia definition risks breaking the law, watchdog says https://t.co/OMabIwC21R

— Times Politics (@timespolitics) October 21, 2025

The Church of England has halted its plans to introduce ‘wedding’ services for same-sex couples after the bishops finally accepted long-resisted legal advice that it is not possible to do so without the approval of two-thirds of General Synod. Plans to allow clergy to enter a same-sex civil marriage have also been scrapped owing to the legal complications, ongoing divisions on the issue and the confusion that bringing in the reform by itself would sow. The Times has more.

This is a victory of sorts for conservatives in the church, who will be relieved that further divisive changes will not be rammed through at this point. The forced departure of Justin Welby as Archbishop of Canterbury last year over safeguarding failures – Welby being the main driving force behind trying to get this question ‘solved’ before he retired – was key in the momentum collapsing, combined with the retirement of a number of stalwart liberal bishops.

While relieved, though, conservatives will also be frustrated that the reasons for dropping the plans now – essentially the legal situation and the voting calculus in Synod – are no different from what they were eight years ago, before huge amounts of church money, time and emotional energy were expended in divisive ‘conversations’ at every level of church life. A number of bishops and others in senior leadership, led by Welby, had chosen to ignore this reality and attempt to find a way, any way, to push through the changes they wanted. The consequence is a church more divided than ever, with pain on both sides, local churches reeling from acrimonious splits and further demoralisation and disengagement in the pews.

Will the church now be able to move on from this lost decade of division? There are signs liberals were already resigned to this outcome, so it’s possible an uneasy truce will now settle, with liberals going back to quietly ignoring the rules in practice while refraining from making big noises about trying to change them.

Read it all and follow the link to the other cited article from the Times.

BREAKING:

CofE bishops won’t give their green light for ‘standalone’ blessing services for gay couples, or for gay priests to have civil same-sex marriages, @TheTimes understands

Will say both would need formal rewrite of church law

Trial of blessing ceremonies can’t go ahead

— Kaya Burgess (@kayaburgess) October 15, 2025