The National Catholic Register portal reports on the conclusion of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2025-2026 term, celebrating rulings on women’s sports, parental rights, and free speech as significant victories for the faithful. The commentary by EWTN legal analyst Andrea M. Picciotti-Bayer frames these decisions—West Virginia v. B.P.J., Chiles v. Salazar, Mirabelli v. Bonta—as a bulwark against gender ideology and state overreach. This celebration of procedural wins within a Masonic constitutional order exposes the conciliar sect’s fatal abandonment of the Social Kingship of Christ, substituting the Rights of Man for the Rights of God.
The Illusion of Victory in the City of Man
The article exults in a 6-3 ruling allowing states to define women’s sports by biological sex, citing Justice Kavanaugh’s reasoning that “separate sports teams for biological males and biological females are reasonable” for “safety and competitive fairness.” Justice Thomas concurs, stating “men and boys with gender dysphoria are not women or girls, even if they believe that they are,” quoting Josef Pieper on the duty not to “use language to obscure reality.” On the linguistic level, this rhetoric is a sedative. It adopts the enemy’s framework—Equal Protection Clause, Title IX, intermediate scrutiny—legitimizing the positivist legal fiction that the State is the arbiter of truth. The Syllabus of Errors condemns the proposition that “The State, as being the origin and source of all rights, is endowed with a certain right not circumscribed by any limits” (Error 39) and that “The civil law prevails” in conflicts with ecclesiastical law (Error 42). By arguing within this framework, the conciliar apologist concedes the principle: Caesar defines the nature of woman, not the Creator. The “victory” is merely a temporary stay of execution granted by the very power that claims the right to redefine reality tomorrow.
Religious Liberty: The Heresy That Undermines the Crown Rights of Christ
The commentary hails Chiles v. Salazar (8-1) as a victory for a “Christian therapist” against Colorado’s “conversion therapy” ban, linking it to Masterpiece Cakeshop and 303 Creative. This triad of cases is presented as a defense of “ideological compulsion.” Theologically, this is the rotten fruit of Dignitatis Humanae. The article frames the right to counsel according to conscience as a civil liberty derived from the First Amendment, not as a duty imposed by the Kingship of Christ. Pius XI in Quas Primas teaches that “the Church, established by Christ as a perfect society, demands for itself by a right belonging to it, which it cannot renounce, full freedom and independence from secular authority.” This freedom is not a “free speech” license to operate a private practice in a pluralist marketplace; it is the Libertas Ecclesiae to teach all nations and bind all consciences to the truth. The Syllabus condemns the error that “Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true” (Error 15) and that “The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Error 80). The “Conscience Project” directed by the author is a modernist construct, elevating subjective conscience above the objective moral law, a proposition condemned in Lamentabili Sane Exitu: “Faith, as assent of the mind, is ultimately based on a sum of probabilities” (Prop. 25) and “The dogmas of faith should be understood according to their practical function, i.e., as binding in action, rather than as principles of belief” (Prop. 26). The therapist’s “win” secures a space for private opinion, not the public reign of Truth.
Parental Rights Without the Supernatural End: A Naturalist Trap
The article highlights Mirabelli v. Bonta and the upcoming International Partners for Ethical Care v. Ferguson, celebrating the Court’s signal that “Parents, not school administrators, are the primary educators of their children.” This is a half-truth weaponized against the whole Truth. Pius XI in Quas Primas insists that education must be ordered to the supernatural end: “Christ reigns in the minds of men… because He Himself is Truth, and men must draw truth from Him and accept it obediently.” The “parental right” defended here is the naturalist right to direct the child’s temporal upbringing, silent on the grave obligation to baptize, catechize, and orient the child toward the Beatific Vision. The Court’s “per curiam” decision rests on “substantive due process” and “free exercise”—Masonic constructs. The Syllabus condemns the idea that “The civil government… has a right to an indirect negative power over religious affairs” (Error 41) and that “The entire government of public schools… may and ought to appertain to the civil power” (Error 45). By fighting for a “religious exemption” within the public school monopoly, the conciliar lawyer accepts the legitimacy of the godless school system. True Catholic action demands the restoration of the Catholic confessional State, not a veto power within the anti-Christian one.
The Conciliar Sect’s Complicity: EWTN and the “Conscience Project”
The author’s bio—”legal analyst for EWTN News, and director of the Conscience Project”—reveals the structural rot. EWTN is a flagship media organ of the conciliar sect, founded on the novus ordo and the false ecumenism of the Second Vatican Council. The “Conscience Project” is the institutionalization of the Modernist error condemned by St. Pius X: the displacement of the Magisterium by the subjective conscience. Lamentabili condemns the proposition that “The Church listening cooperates in such a way with the Church teaching in defining truths of faith, that the Church teaching should only approve the common opinions of the Church listening” (Prop. 6). The article’s tone—bureaucratic, procedural, celebratory of “access to federal court”—is the language of the City of Man. It ignores the Landor v. Louisiana defeat (denying damages to a Rastafarian prisoner) not as a symptom of the State’s inherent hostility to true religion, but as a mere “disappointment.” It treats the mifepristone (abortion pill) issue as a “regulatory framework… rushed” matter of “women’s safety,” not as the crimen nefandum of child sacrifice protected by the Supreme Court’s own Roe/Casey/Dobbs lineage. This is the “laicism” Pius XI denounced: “the secularism of our times, so-called laicism, its errors and wicked endeavors… began with the denial of Christ the Lord’s reign over all nations.”
Silence on the Kingship of Christ: The Gravest Omission
The article concludes by affirming that “the Constitution bends to neither fashion nor ideology” and looks forward to a case on “passive displays of the Ten Commandments in public schools” to “clarify that the Establishment Clause does not prevent recognizing America’s religious heritage.” This is the ultimate blasphemy: reducing the Decalogue to a “passive display” of “heritage” in a temple of secularism. Quas Primas declares: “Let rulers of states therefore not refuse public veneration and obedience to the reigning Christ… For what we wrote at the beginning of Our Pontificate about the diminishing authority of law and respect for power… ‘When God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states… the foundations of that authority were destroyed’.” The Syllabus anathematizes the separation of Church and State (Error 55). The conciliar commentator, ensconced in the “neo-church,” seeks only a modus vivendi with the Antichrist’s legal order. She celebrates the “victory” of keeping boys off the girls’ track team while the Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary is denied in the White House, the Capitol, and the “cathedrals” of the conciliar sect. There is no “victory” in the courts of the synagogue of Satan (Apoc. 2:9); there is only the non serviam of the faithful who refuse to render unto Caesar the things that are God’s.
Source:
Supreme Court Delivers Victories for Parental Rights, Women’s Sports and Free Speech (ncregister.com)
Date: 30.06.2026