(SAN SALVADOR, EL SALVADOR) — The government of El Salvador on Monday rejected a request from four Democratic lawmakers to visit wrongly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
The lawmakers were trying to arrange a meeting four days after a visit from Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, where Abrego Garcia and his family live.
In an interview with MSNBC from El Salvador, Florida Rep. Maxwell Frost said Monday that he and the others were told that their visit was rejected because they are not in El Salvador “in an official capacity.”
“We’re not giving up,” Frost said. “We have more meetings scheduled.”
Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran native who has been living with his wife and children in Maryland, was deported in March to El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison — despite a 2019 court order barring his deportation to that country due to fear of persecution — after the Trump administration claimed he was a member of the criminal gang MS-13.
The Trump administration, while acknowledging that Abrego Garcia was deported to El Salvador in error, has said that his alleged MS-13 affiliation makes him ineligible to return to the United States. His wife and attorney have denied that he is an MS-13 member.
An official with the U.S. Department of State said Monday in a status report that Abrego Garcia is in “good conditions and in an excellent state of health.”
“The Salvadoran government responded on April 21 that Mr. Abrego Garcia is being held at the Centro Industrial penitentiary facility in Santa Ana,” Michael Kozak, a senior bureau official for the State Department, reported.
Sen. Van Hollen said that Abrego Garcia told him at their meeting that he had been transferred out of CECOT “about eight days” prior.
(WASHINGTON) — Harvard University is suing President Donald Trump’s administration for threatening to withhold federal funding if the school did not comply with its list of demands.
The lawsuit, filed in Massachusetts federal court, asks a judge to block the funding freeze from going into effect, arguing the move is “unlawful and beyond the government’s authority.”
In it, lawyers for the university argue that the administration is unlawfully using billions of dollars in federal funding as “leverage to gain control of academic decision-making at Harvard.”
They also allege that the funding freeze violates the First Amendment, flouts federal law and threatens life-saving medical research.
“All told, the tradeoff put to Harvard and other universities is clear: Allow the Government to micromanage your academic institution or jeopardize the institution’s ability to pursue medical breakthroughs, scientific discoveries, and innovative solutions,” Harvard’s lawyers wrote.
Earlier this month, following the school’s refusal to budge on the government’s demands, the administration’s Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism – alleging the school has failed to confront antisemitism on campus – froze $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts, and it reportedly plans to pull an additional $1 billion in funding for medical research.
The decision followed Harvard University President Alan Garber’s letter on April 14, which said that the school “will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights” by agreeing to a series of terms proposed by the Trump administration.
The lawsuit is the school’s latest effort to push back against the administration’s threats.
“The Government has not—and cannot—identify any rational connection between antisemitism concerns and the medical, scientific, technological, and other research it has frozen that aims to save American lives, foster American success, preserve American security, and maintain America’s position as a global leader in innovation,” the lawsuit said. “Nor has the Government acknowledged the significant consequences that the indefinite freeze of billions of dollars in federal research funding will have on Harvard’s research programs, the beneficiaries of that research, and the national interest in furthering American innovation and progress.”
In addition to arguing the funding freeze violates the First Amendment, Harvard’s lawyers alleged the Trump administration failed to comply with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which sets out a series of procedures needed before funding can be frozen.
“The Government made no effort to follow those procedures—nor the procedures provided for in Defendants’ own agency regulations—before freezing Harvard’s federal funding,” the lawsuit said.
The school asked a federal judge to declare the funding freeze unlawful, block it from taking effect and enjoin the government unilaterally freezing furniture funding without following the steps laid out by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Garber announced the lawsuit in a letter published to the school’s website on Monday, saying the administration’s demands sought to impose “unprecedented and improper control” over the university.
“Doubling down on the letter’s sweeping and intrusive demands—which would impose unprecedented and improper control over the University—the government has, in addition to the initial freeze of $2.2 billion in funding, considered taking steps to freeze an additional $1 billion in grants, initiated numerous investigations of Harvard’s operations, threatened the education of international students, and announced that it is considering a revocation of Harvard’s 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status,” Garber’s statement said.
“These actions have stark real-life consequences for patients, students, faculty, staff, researchers, and the standing of American higher education in the world,” it continued.
The Trump administration has also cut funding at Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Princeton, the University of Pennsylvania and Northwestern — with Harvard being the most high-profile and first university to explicitly refuse the government’s demands.
“Today, we stand for the values that have made American higher education a beacon for the world. We stand for the truth that colleges and universities across the country can embrace and honor their legal obligations and best fulfill their essential role in society without improper government intrusion,” Garber said in his statement announcing the lawsuit on Monday.
The White House did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Christoph Reichwein/picture alliance via Getty Images
(VATICAN CITY) — The question looming on many minds around the world following the death of Pope Francis on Monday is who will become the next leader of the Roman Catholic Church.
The selection process will begin when all cardinals under the age of 80 who are eligible to participate are summoned to Rome to prepare for the secret conclave inside the Sistine Chapel to choose the next pontiff. This gathering typically begins between 15 to 20 days after the pope’s death.
While the inner workings of the conclave and how the group ultimately decides on a new pontiff remain a secret, experts are still weighing in on who could be the likely front-runners for the papacy.
Francis, who was a progressive leader of the church, had appointed roughly 80% of the cardinals who are eligible to vote for the new pope, according to Miles Pattenden, historian of the Catholic Church at Oxford University. But, Pattenden told ABC News that does not mean the next pontiff will directly mirror the same values as Francis.
“It’s a mistake to think of [Francis’ cardinals] as one homogenous block. Not all of them will have shared Francis’ views,” Pattenden told ABC News. “Some of them will have been open about that. He appointed them because they represented important areas or factions in the church that he thought should be represented. Other ones possibly weren’t in harmony with all of Francis’ views, but kept quiet about it. Now he’s no more, we will see where their actual positions are.”
Any baptized Catholic male is eligible to take Francis’ place, but Pattenden said Pietro Parolin, the cardinal secretary of state, and Luis Tagle, the archbishop of Manila in the Philippines, are the main front-runners.
Pietro Parolin
Parolin, who “looks very much on paper like he should be the obvious continuity candidate,” has been the secretary of state since August 2013 and is a “vastly experienced Vatican diplomat,” Petterden said.
“He’s got all the right credentials. The question is whether most of the cardinals want that or not,” Pattenden said.
Cristina Traina, religious studies professor at New York’s Fordham University, said Parolin is someone who is “extraordinarily versed in the internal workings of the Vatican, but that could count against him if they are interested in continuing Vatican reforms.”
Luis Tagle
A candidate similar in “charisma and emphasis on pastoral mission” to Francis is Tagle, who was appointed by Pope Benedict as the archbishop of Manila in 2011, Pattenden said.
“His downside is that he may be a little bit young, he’s only 67,” Pattenden said. “It’s not clear that he has the right kind of administrative experience. If the cardinals are looking for someone to steady the ship and to make sure that the Vatican stays in order, maybe they want someone else.”
Even though Francis “elevated a lot of cardinals with generally progressive views” and “it would be fairly automatic they’d choose one of their own, someone in Francis’ image,” Pattenden said there are still conservative candidates that could gain recognition, including Hungarian Cardinal Peter Erdo, Ghanaian Cardinal Peter Turkson and Guinean Cardinal Robert Sarah.
European moderates: Matteo Zuppi, Jean-Marc Aveline, Mario Grech
If the “more obvious front-runners don’t command majority appeal” during the selection process, Pattenden said European moderates, including Archbishop of Bologna Matteo Zuppi, Archbishop of Marseille Jean-Marc Aveline and Archbishop of Malta Mario Grech, could also potentially gain consensus among the conclave.
Regardless of who the successor will be, Traina told ABC News the new papacy will vary from Francis’, since not many candidates hold his stance of being pastorally progressive yet theologically conservative.
Pope Francis progressives: Marc Ouelett, Willem Eijk
The only two that Traina said resemble Francis’ approach would be Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouelett or Dutch Cardinal Willem Eijk.
“Successors have different skills than their predecessors, and that’s not because people are rejecting the predecessor skills,” Traina said. “It wouldn’t be surprising for there to be a change, the question is, which direction?”
ABC News’ Phoebe Natanson contributed to this report.
(VATICAN CITY) — Pope Francis, one of the more progressive pontiff’s in the history of the Roman Catholic Church, died on Monday morning at the age of 88, the Vatican confirmed.
Francis’ willingness to take a more progressive stance on issues from LGBTQ rights to same-sex marriage to immigration make him one of the most progressive and influential popes of the modern era.
Here are memorable moments from Francis’ time where he voiced his opinions on those topics.
Francis’ stance on members of the LGBTQ community
In December 2023, Francis formally signed off on allowing Catholic priests to bless same-sex couples, he said in a declaration released by the Vatican’s office.
The declaration stated, “When people ask for a blessing, an exhaustive moral analysis should not be placed as a precondition for conferring it. For those seeking a blessing should not be required to have prior moral perfection.”
“A blessing offers people a means to increase their trust in God. The request for a blessing, thus, expresses and nurtures openness to the transcendence, mercy and the closeness to God in a thousand concrete circumstances of life, which is no small thing in the world in which we live,” the declaration stated.
Before this declaration, Francis had previously reaffirmed the church’s stance on marriage — “an exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to procreation” — but also said he advocated for “pastoral charity.”
“The defense of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity; it also includes kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness and encouragement. Therefore, we cannot be judges who only deny, reject and exclude,” he said in a letter written in July 2023.
He added that “pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not convey a mistaken concept of marriage.”
In an exclusive interview with The Associated Press earlier that year, Francis said “being homosexual isn’t a crime.”
In 2013, during his first foreign trip as pope, a journalist asked Francis a question about gay priests, to which he replied: “If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge?”
Francis on migrants: ‘The Son of God, in becoming man, also chose to live the drama of immigration’
In a letter shared in February, Francis rebuked the Trump administration over the migrant deportations occurring in the United States in the wake of the president’s second inauguration, calling it a “major crisis.”
“The family of Nazareth in exile, Jesus, Mary and Joseph, emigrants in Egypt and refugees there to escape the wrath of an ungodly king, are the model, the example and the consolation of emigrants and pilgrims of every age and country, of all refugees of every condition who, beset by persecution or necessity, are forced to leave their homeland, beloved family and dear friends to foreign lands,” the letter read.
He said that he “act of deporting people who in many cases have left their own land for reasons of extreme poverty, insecurity, exploitation, persecution or serious deterioration of the environment, damages the dignity of many men and woman, and of entire families, and places them in a state of particular vulnerability and defenselessness.”
Francis, who was the first pope from Latin America, also donated $500,000 to migrants at the U.S. border back in 2019 to assist in providing food, lodging and basic necessities for those fleeing their home countries through Mexico.
Francis previously stated he was against surrogacy, abortion
In an interview with CBS News’ Norah O’Donnell in May 2024, Francis stated surrogacy is “not authorized” and advocated for adoption.
“Sometimes surrogacy has become a business, and that is very bad,” Francis told CBS News. “The other hope is adoption. In each case, the situation should be carefully and clearly considered, consulted medically and then morally as well.”
In 2014, the pontiff also shared his views on abortion, calling it part of the world’s “throwaway culture.”
“Unfortunately, what is thrown away is not only food and dispensable objects, but often human beings themselves, who are discarded as ‘unnecessary,'” Francis said in 2014 during his “State of the World” address.
(NEW YORK) — A jury has found Nadine Menendez guilty in her federal bribery trial, following the conviction of her husband, former New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez, on similar crimes.
Prosecutors argued the two were “partners in crime” while accusing them of accepting cash, gold bars and a luxury car in exchange for political favors.
The defense argued there was no proof Nadine Menendez was involved in the scheme her husband was found guilty of perpetrating.
Jurors began deliberating Friday afternoon before reaching their verdict Monday afternoon.
She will be sentenced in June, the same month her husband is due to report to prison to begin serving an 11-year sentence.
She pleaded not guilty to 15 charges, including conspiracy to commit bribery, conspiracy to commit honest services fraud and conspiracy to commit extortion under color of official right. Several of the charges carry a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.
Bob Menendez was sentenced to 11 years in prison in January after being convicted on all 16 counts last year in his federal corruption trial, becoming the first sitting member of Congress to be convicted of acting as a foreign agent.
A jury found him guilty of accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of bribes — including gold, cash, a luxury convertible, payments toward Nadine Menendez’s home mortgage and compensation for her no-show job — from three New Jersey businessmen, who have also been convicted.
“Nadine Menendez and Senator Menendez were partners in crime,” acting U.S. Attorney Matthew Podolsky said in a statement following the verdict in the corruption and foreign influence scheme. “Over the span of five years, Nadine Menendez agreed to accept and accepted all sorts of bribes — including gold bars, cash, a Mercedes-Benz convertible, and a no-show job — all in exchange for the Senator’s corrupt official acts. Together, Nadine Menendez and the Senator placed their own interests and greed ahead of the interests of the citizens the Senator was elected to serve.”
“Today’s verdict sends the clear message that the power of government officials may not be put up for sale, and that all those who facilitate corruption will be held accountable for their actions,” he added.
The FBI said it found $70,000 in cash in Nadine Menendez’s safe deposit box and the rest inside congressional jackets bearing Bob Menendez’s name.
Shortly after the two began dating in 2018, Nadine Menendez introduced Egyptian intelligence and military officials to then-Sen. Bob Menendez, according to federal prosecutors, who alleged those introductions helped establish a corrupt agreement in which they accepted bribes in exchange for her husband’s actions to benefit Egypt.
Witnesses in the trial included Jose Uribe, a New Jersey businessman who pleaded guilty last year and testified for the government. Prosecutors said Uribe paid for Menendez’s $60,000 Mercedes-Benz convertible in exchange for helping disrupt a criminal investigation by the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office related to Uribe.
Nadine Menendez was supposed to stand trial alongside her husband, but the judge allowed her to stand trial separately to accommodate her breast cancer diagnosis. Her trial was postponed several times while she underwent treatment.
The trial itself was also suspended for several days because she was ill.
On March 17, on the eve of jury selection in Nadine Menendez’s trial, the former senator posted on X that his wife was being “forced by the government to go to trial” despite having recent reconstructive surgery for breast cancer.
“Only the arrogance of the SDNY can be so cruel and inhumane,” Bob Menendez said in the post, which tagged President Donald Trump. “They should let her fully recover.”
Following his sentencing, Bob Menendez called the prosecution a “political witch hunt” and that he hopes Trump “cleans up the cesspool and restores the integrity to the system.”
In issuing Bob Menendez’s sentence, Judge Sidney Stein said the former senator would not have to report to prison until June 6 so that he could be available during his wife’s trial.
(NEW YORK) — Lawyers for the Justice Department, facing pushback on the Trump administration’s efforts to deport alleged migrant gang members under the wartime Alien Enemies Act, told a federal judge in Colorado Monday that they would give such migrants at least 24 hours to file a habeas petition contesting their removal.
The move came during a hearing Monday in which U.S. District Judge Charlotte Sweeney heard arguments over a temporary order she issued barring the administration from removing any noncitizens from Colorado under the 18th century authority that lets noncitizens be removed with little-to-no due process.
Regarding individuals who file for habeas corpus, the DOJ attorney said “the government, at this time, has no intent to remove those individuals pending litigation.”
In response, ACLU Colorado Legal Director Tim Macdonald argued that it is “preposterous” to suggest that a 24-hour notice would be enough time to allow people to file a habeas petition.
“I guess we should be peppering this court with hundreds of habeas petitions to the extent the government even allows us in the facility to talk to those people,” said Macdonald. “That’s not the way the rule of law should work.”
The hearing came two days after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the AEA deportations of Venezuelan migrants being held in northern Texas after attorneys for the men said the accused gang members had received notices saying they were about to be deported.
Macdonald on Monday argued that the notices are “chilling to anyone who cares about due process” and requested the judge grant a temporary restraining order blocking such deportations in Colorado.
“If your honor were to deny the TRO, [the government] could either begin removing people immediately from the District of Colorado or find another jurisdiction where they don’t yet have a TRO and begin removing people there,” Macdonald said. “This has life or death consequences.”
The Trump administration last month touched off a legal battle when it invoked the Alien Enemies Act to deport two planeloads of alleged migrant gang members to the CECOT mega-prison in El Salvador by arguing that the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua is a “hybrid criminal state” that is invading the United States.
An official with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acknowledged that “many” of the men lack criminal records in the United States — but said that “the lack of specific information about each individual actually highlights the risk they pose” and “demonstrates that they are terrorists with regard to whom we lack a complete profile.”
“The alleged harm to the government being unable to remove someone from a statute that was last seen more than 75 years ago … is trivial in comparison to the harms the humans that have been sent to the CECOT, potentially for the rest of their lives,” Macdonald argued Monday.
Judge Sweeney said her existing order would remain in effect until she issues a new ruling in 24 hours.
Also Monday, a federal judge in San Francisco will consider next steps after that judge last month put a temporary pause on the Trump administration’s plans to end legal protections and benefits for up to 350,000 Venezuelan migrants.
The hearing comes after an appeals court on Friday denied the Trump administration’s effort to block that pause.
The alleged Venezuelan gang members deported to El Salvador last month were sent to CECOT as part of a $6 million deal the Trump administration made with Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele for El Salvador to house migrant detainees as part of President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.
In a post on social media on Sunday, Bukele proposed repatriating the 252 Venezuelans deported from the U.S. in exchange for the release of an equal number of “political prisoners” from Venezuela.
“I want to propose a humanitarian agreement that includes the repatriation of 100% of the 252 Venezuelans who were deported, in exchange for the release and surrender of an identical number (252) of the thousands of political prisoners you hold,” Bukele wrote to Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on X in Spanish.
Last week, Venezuelan Minister of Interior Relations Diosdado Cabello claimed that the Venezuelan government has “proved” that none of the Venezuelan migrants the Trump administration deported to El Salvador are members of Tren de Aragua.
The Trump administration did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
(WASHINGTON) — Department of Homeland Security Seceretary Kristi Noem’s purse was stolen at a Washington restaurant over the weekend, according to a DHS official.
Noem had $3,000 in cash in her purse, along with her passport, makeup bag, DHS access card, apartment key and other items.
A DHS official said the secretary had the cash because her family was in town and she was treating them to Easter festivities.
A man wearing a mask walked by the secretary’s table and snatched the purse. The Secret Service is investigating, according to the DHS official.
(NEW YORK) — U.S. stocks tumbled in early trading on Monday as President Donald Trump escalated his criticism of the Federal Reserve, urging the central bank to immediately lower interest rates and questioning the policy approach of Fed Chair Jerome Powell.
The comments came days after Trump said he was eager for Powell’s “termination” despite a longstanding norm of political independence at the central bank.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged 1,050 points, or 2.6%, while the S&P 500 fell 2.7%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq declined 3%.
Last week, Powell voiced alarm about Trump’s tariff policy, saying it would likely hike inflation and slow economic growth. Powell indicated that the Fed may approach interest rates with restraint as policymakers observe the economic effects of Trump’s tariffs.
In a social media post on Monday, Trump dubbed Powell “Mr. Too Late” in reference to a policy approach that Trump views as overly cautious.
Trump warned of the possibility of an economic slowdown “unless Mr. Too Late, a major loser, lowers interest rates, NOW.”
In addition, Trump claimed without evidence that interest rate cuts enacted by the Fed last year had stemmed from an effort to “help Sleepy Joe Biden, later Kamala, get elected.”
Since Powell became Fed chair in 2018, he has repeatedly affirmed the Fed’s political independence. The Fed is an independent government agency established by Congress.
In November, days after Trump’s election victory, Powell struck a defiant tone when asked whether he would resign from his position if Trump asked him to.
“No,” Powell said, pausing to let the one-word answer register with the reporters assembled at a press conference at the Fed headquarters, blocks away from the White House.
When asked whether Trump could fire or demote him, Powell responded: “Not permitted under the law.”
Powell last week raised the possibility of what economists call “stagflation,” which is when inflation rises and the economy slows.
If the Fed raises interest rates as a means of protecting against tariff-induced inflation under such a scenario, it risks stifling borrowing and slowing the economy further, experts previously told ABC News.
On the other hand, experts said, if the Fed lowers rates to stimulate the economy in the face of a potential slowdown, it threatens to boost spending and worsen inflation.
(WASHINGTON) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Monday reacted to the revelation he discussed details about an imminent attack on Houthis in Yemen in March in a second Signal group chat — one that included his wife and brother.
Speaking to reporters at the White House Easter Egg Roll, which he attended with his family, Hegseth attacked those he said were “disgruntled” former employees and the media for what he said was “anonymous smears.”
“I have spoken with the president and we are going to continue fighting. On the same page all the way,” Hegseth said.
President Donald Trump defended Hegseth and said he still has “great confidence” in him as he took reporter questions at the White House celebration.
“Here we go again. Just a waste of time. He is doing a great job,” Trump said of Hegseth.
“Ask the Houthis how he’s doing,” the president added.
Sources told ABC News that Hegseth shared information about a forthcoming attack on Houthi rebels in Yemen in a Signal message chat that included his wife Jennifer, who does not work for the Defense Department, as well as his brother and his personal lawyer.
Hegseth did not explicitly deny the report as he was asked to respond to the reports on Monday.
“They take anonymous sources from disgruntled former employees, and then they try to slash and burn people and ruin their reputations. Not going to work with me, because we’re changing the Defense Department, putting the Pentagon back in the hands of war fighters and anonymous smears from disgruntled former employees on old news doesn’t matter,” he said.
The second Signal chat reportedly occurred around the same time that top Trump officials, including Hegseth, discussed a strike on Houthis over the commercially-available app. That text chain came to light because inadvertently added to the chat was The Atlantic’s Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg. The Pentagon’s independent inspector general is currently reviewing Hegseth’s use of Signal to discuss military actions.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, pressed on the latest revelation on “Fox & Friends” on Monday, said “the president stands strongly behind Secretary Hegseth” and said Hegseth “is doing a phenomenal job leading the Pentagon.”
The use of Signal to discuss sensitive military operations may complicate ongoing investigations into potential leaks involving the first known group chat, which included top aides and other members of Hegseth’s team — at least three of whom have been since fired in relation to the inquiry.
Those officials — Dan Caldwell, Colin Carroll and Darin Selnick — have since spoken out against what they say are baseless accusations against them.
“At this time, we still have not been told what exactly we were investigated for, if there is still an active investigation, or if there was even a real investigation of ‘leaks’ to begin with,” they said in a joint statement on X on April 19.
Leavitt, when responding to the Hegseth news on Monday, also sought to blame former employees as she defended the defense secretary.
“The administration and the president have taken a very strong stance against anyone who leaks, especially sensitive and classified information that can put our troops and our war fighters at risk,” Leavitt said on Fox. “And you’ve seen the secretary has taken very strong action to rein in the leakers at the Pentagon and he will continue to do so I’m sure.”
ABC News’ Luis Martinez and Kelsey Walsh contributed to this report.
(VATICAN CITY) — Cardinal Kevin Farrell, the senior Vatican official who announced Pope Francis’ death on Monday morning, will serve as head of the Catholic Church until a new pope is elected, according to the Vatican.
Born in Ireland, the 77-year-old Farrell has long ties in the United States, having served as the bishop of the Diocese of Dallas and auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., according to the Vatican.
Pope Francis nominated Farrell in 2019 to be the Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church with the responsibility of administering the property and revenues of the Holy See. In 2020, Francis also appointed Farrell as president of the Church’s Commission on Confidential Matters and in 2023, the late pontiff elevated Farrell to president of the Vatican City State Supreme Court, according to the Vatican.
On Monday morning, Farrell broke the news to the world of Pope Francis’ death, reading a statement at the chapel of the Domus Santa Marta at the Vatican, the pope’s residence and where he died. In the announcement, Farrell said, “At 7:35 this morning, the Bishop of Rome, Francis, returned to the house of the Father.”
“Dearest brothers and sisters, with deep sorrow I must announce the death of our Holy Father Francis,” Farrell said.
Standing next to Farrell for the somber announcement were Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican secretary of state, Archbishop Edgar Peña Parra, substitute chief of staff, and Archbishop Diego Ravelli, master of liturgical ceremonies.
“His entire life was dedicated to the service of the Lord and his Church,” Farrell said of Francis. “He taught us to live the values of the gospel with fidelity, courage, and universal love, especially in favor of the poorest and marginalized. With immense gratitude for his example of a true disciple of the Lord Jesus, we commend the soul of Pope Francis to the infinite merciful love of the triune God.”
The Holy See Press Office said Farrell will preside over the rite of ascertainment of death, or the certification of death, and placement of the late Pope Francis’ body in the coffin, which is scheduled to occur Monday night.
Farrell will be joined at the ritual by Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, the dean of the College of Cardinals, relatives of the pope and other church officials, according to the Vatican press office.
Farrell is now in charge of the Holy See’s day-to-day operations during what is known as the “Apostolica Sede Vacans,” the period between the pope’s death and the election of the next pontiff during a secret gathering of cardinals in the Sistine Chapel.
Farrell is also expected to lead a procession transporting the pope’s body from the chapel of the Domus Santa Marta to St. Peter’s Basilica.
Born in 1947 in Dublin, Ireland, Farrell attended the University of Salamanca in Spain and the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, according to his biography on the Vatican’s website. He holds degrees in philosophy and theology from the University of St. Thomas in Rome. Farrell began studying for the priesthood in 1966 and was ordained a priest on Dec. 24, 1978, according to his biography.
After his ordination, he served as chaplain of the Regnum Christi Movement at the University of Monterrey in Mexico.
In 1984, Farrell was incardinated in the archdiocese of Washington, D.C., where he served as assistant pastor at St. Thomas the Apostle Church for a year before becoming the director of the Spanish Catholic Center in 1986, according to his biography. He also served as the executive director of the Catholic Charitable Organizations from 1987 to 1988. He was appointed pastor of the Annunciation parish in Washington, D.C., in 2000 and served until 2002.
In 2002, Farrell was appointed auxiliary bishop for the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., and served in that role until 2007, when he became bishop of the Diocese of Dallas.
In 2016, Pope Francis called Farrell to the Vatican to serve as the vicar general of administration and moderator of the Roman Curia, the administrative arm of the Holy See and the central governing body of the Catholic Church, according to his biography.
