(WASHINGTON) — Preventive care health benefits provided at no cost to tens of millions of Americans since 2010 under a popular provision of the Affordable Care Act are in the balance Monday at the U.S. Supreme Court as the justices consider whether the government task force behind the mandate to insurers is unconstitutional.
Among the services the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force designates for no-cost coverage under the federal health law are statins to lower cholesterol; colonoscopies for 45- to 49-year-olds; preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) medicine to reduce the spread of HIV; medications to lower the risk of breast cancer for women; and lung cancer screenings for smokers.
The case was brought by a group of employers and individuals who oppose some of the task force’s recommendations for covered services on religious groups, specifically the PrEP medication to prevent HIV. They allege the group’s structure violates the Constitution and lower federal courts agreed.
If the justices uphold the decisions, the task force and its recommendations since 2010 could be invalidated — and along with them the guarantee of no-cost preventive services coverage many people enjoy.
“The case is not the kind of existential threat that we have seen in previous Supreme Court cases involving the ACA, but it’s certainly something that could affect a lot of people,” said Larry Levitt, executive vice president at KFF, a nonpartisan health policy group.
At the heart of the dispute is whether the structure of the 16-member task force is illegal under the Constitution’s Appointments Clause. The provision requires “principle officers” of the U.S. government, such as Cabinet secretaries and ambassadors, to be confirmed by the Senate. It stipulates that “inferior officers” who are appointed by Senate-confirmed officials are permissible, provided they are supervised and reviewed.
The plaintiffs allege that members of the task force, who are appointed and supervised by the Health and Human Services secretary, are not properly appointed and have too much power. While they can be removed at will, their recommendations for covered health services cannot be reviewed or overridden by anyone.
“Americans have the constitutionally protected freedom to live and work according to their religious beliefs, and governments exist to defend that freedom,” said Daniel Grabowski, an attorney with Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal advocacy group supporting the plaintiffs. “We urge the Supreme Court to restore this accountability within the federal government and to the American people.”
The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled the task force unconstitutional and that its recommendations since 2010 be invalidated.
The Trump administration is defending the constitutionality of the task force and the health secretary’s power to oversee the body’s recommendations.
More than 150 million Americans rely on early screenings and interventions for chronic conditions under no-cost preventive services, according to American medical organizations. Public health groups say a decision striking down the task force could deeply affect the long-term health of Americans and disease prevention efforts. Insurers worry that it could inject instability into the insurance market, while hospital groups fear they may have to shoulder more of the burden from people who are sicker.
“The ACA’s preventive services requirement has been a game-changer, providing access to evidence-based preventive care and early detection of serious medical conditions,” said Wayne Turner, a senior attorney at the National Health Law Program, a nonprofit group that advocates for low-income communities. “The ACA’s coverage and cost-sharing protections are especially important for low-income persons, who will be harmed most if the Supreme Court refuses to allow the ACA provision to stand.”
Oral arguments in the case — Kennedy v. Braidwood Management — will be heard at the Supreme Court on Monday. A decision in the case is expected by the end of June.
(WASHINGTON) — Department of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared details about an imminent attack on Houthis in Yemen in March in a second group chat using the messaging app Signal that included his wife, his brother and his personal lawyer, two sources familiar with the contents of the chat told ABC News.
Those details shared in the second chat included the flight schedules for the F/A-18 Hornets involved in the pending attack on Houthi positions, according to the officials. The New York Times was first to report Hegseth’s sharing of the details in a second Signal group.
The sharing of the details reportedly occurred around the same time in mid-March when key members of President Donald Trump’s National Security Council, including Hegseth, inadvertently shared details about the March 15 missile strike in Yemen with the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic.
Much of the same content was shared in the second encrypted chat with family members and others — a chat group that Hegseth had created on his personal phone during his confirmation process, the two officials told ABC News.
Hegseth’s wife, Jennifer Hegseth, does not work for the Defense Department.
His brother, Phil Hegseth, works as a senior adviser at the Department of Homeland Security and is detailed to the Defense Department. Tim Parlatore, Hegseth’s personal attorney, works at the Pentagon as a Navy reservist assigned to Hegseth’s office.
Sean Parnell, chief spokesperson for the Pentagon, responded to reports of the second chat in a statement on X on Sunday night saying in part, “Another day, another old story—back from the dead. The Trump-hating media continues to be obsessed with destroying anyone committed to President Trump’s agenda.”
The statement continued, “There was no classified information in any Signal chat, no matter how many ways they try to write the story. What is true is that the Office of the Secretary of Defense is continuing to become stronger and more efficient in executing President Trump’s agenda.”
Sources confirmed with ABC News that the second known Signal chat was originally created to discuss scheduling and administrative information.
The Pentagon’s independent inspector general is evaluating Hegseth’s use of the Signal app “to determine the extent to which the Secretary of Defense and other DoD personnel complied with DoD policies and procedures” to conduct official business, the acting inspector general, Steven Stebbins, said in a notification letter to Hegseth.
The Trump administration has repeatedly refuted the idea that any classified information was shared in the first known chat thread; however, several former U.S. officials have contended that the sharing of such information over unapproved channels could at a minimum put troops overseas at risk.
Its use to divulge sensitive military operations may complicate ongoing investigations into potential leaks involving the first known group chat, which included top aides and other members of Pete 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.
John Ullyot, the Pentagon’s former top spokesman, on Sunday published an opinion piece in Politico where he described “a month of total chaos at the Pentagon.”
“From leaks of sensitive operational plans to mass firings, the dysfunction is now a major distraction for the president — who deserves better from his senior leadership,” he wrote.
“Hegseth is now presiding over a strange and baffling purge that has left him without his two closest advisers of over a decade — Caldwell and Selnick — and without chiefs of staff for him and his deputy,” Ullyot wrote.
“Even strong backers of the secretary like me must admit: The last month has been a full-blown meltdown at the Pentagon — and it’s becoming a real problem for the administration,” he added.
“President Donald Trump has a strong record of holding his top officials to account,” wrote Ullyot. “Given that, it’s hard to see Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth remaining in his role for much longer.”
Ullyot left the Pentagon late last week after having been sidelined after he controversially defended the removal of Jackie Robinson information from a DOD website.
He said earlier this week that he had left the Pentagon on his own accord, while a senior defense official told ABC News that Ullyot was asked to resign.
(WASHINGTON) — After his deportation was temporarily blocked by a Supreme Court order, 19-year-old Venezuelan migrant Alessandro Paredes spoke to ABC News from a detention center in Texas.
“This is not being done by law, this is totally illegal and it’s out of the blue,” Paredes said, recounting the attempted deportation on Friday.
“We get grabbed in the morning, about four in the morning, and just get taken into a van. They tried to put us into a plane,” he said from Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Bluebonnet Detention Center in Anson, Texas.
Paredes said that before arriving at an airport, the van he was in suddenly turned around and returned him and other detainees to Bluebonnet.
In a statement to ABC News, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt blasted the order from the Supreme Court that blocked deportations from the Northern District and said the White House is confident the actions by the administration are lawful.
“President Trump promised the American people to use all lawful measures to remove the threat of terrorist illegal aliens, like members of TdA, from the United States. We are confident in the lawfulness of the Administration’s actions and in ultimately prevailing against an onslaught of meritless litigation brought by radical activists who care more about the rights of terrorist aliens than those of the American people,” Leavitt said in her statement.
Paredes claimed to ABC News he and others were “forced to sign a paper” saying they are part of a gang. On Friday, the ACLU submitted a document they say their clients at Bluebonnet received from immigration officials. The document, titled “Notice and Warrant of Apprehension and Removal under the Alien Enemies Act,” says, “You have been determined to be… a member of Tren de Aragua.”
“We have been forced to sign a paper, right here, basically saying that we are part of a gang, that we are part of it, and they’re forcing us to sign it,” Paredes said.
Stephen Miller, Trump’s homeland security adviser, responded to a post on X by a FOX News reporter that includes a list allegedly provided by a DHS official of “suspected Venezuelan TdA gang members” detained in Texas that the Trump administration “was planning to deport before SCOTUS stepped in.”
The list included Paredes’ name and photo and says that he is a confirmed TdA member and says that he is facing criminal charges for “aggravated assault with a weapon, pointing, and presenting firearms at a person.” The post also includes photos of Paredes’ tattoos of a cross and a clock.
“This is who the Democrats are fighting to keep in your neighborhood,” Miller said in response to the social media post of the list.
A review of court records found one charge against Paredes in South Carolina for “pointing and presenting firearms at a person” in February. The case is still ongoing and Paredes is scheduled to have his second court appearance in August.
According to WCIV, an ABC News affiliate, Paredes turned himself in on the gun charge and was booked into Al Cannon Detention Center in Charleston County, South Carolina in February. The ICE detainee locator confirms Paredes is currently at Bluebonnet Detention Center.
Paredes’ mom told ABC News in a statement through their attorney that she denies the allegation that her son is a member of TdA.
“My son is only 19 years old,” the mother said, who did not want to be named. “He was a good student, a talented football player, and a loving son. He is a devout Catholic. He carries his faith on his body and in his heart — he even had a large cross tattooed on his body to mark his lifelong commitment to God.”
“He’s not a terrorist,” she said, adding that she wishes for her son to be sent to Venezuela.
“Please do not send him to El Salvador — a country he has never known, where he faces grave danger and has no support,” she added.
Earlier this month, SCOTUS lifted an injunction that barred deportations under the AEA and ruled that any person the administration sought to deport under the proclamation must be given due process. The ACLU argued Friday that the Venezuelan migrants who are being held in a detention center in Texas are at risk of deportation and have not had adequate notice or enough time to challenge their removals, violating the court’s requirement that the men have “reasonable time” to practice their due process rights.When asked by ABC News if he fears being deported to El Salvador, Paredes said he is “very scared” because he and the other detainees are not from El Salvador.
“We are very scared [that] everybody here will get deported to El Salvador,” Paredes said. “Because, first of all, we are not from there. Most people in here got no criminal records. Not even a ticket, nothing.”
“There’s underage people,” Paredes added. “We even got disabled people right here next to me.”
Paredes said he was not given any information on Friday and he still has not received answers from the officers at the detention center.
“They just tell us that they don’t know anything, and they don’t give us any kind of information,” Paredes said.
“We just want justice, we are humans, we have human rights,” Paredes added. “We just want to go back to our country.”
(TRILLA, IL) — Four people from Wisconsin were killed on Saturday when their private, single-engine plane crashed in a field near an airport in rural Illinois after reportedly striking powerlines, authorities said.
The Cessna 180G aircraft crashed about 10:16 a.m. local time Saturday in the unincorporated community of Trilla, Illinois, southeast of Coles County Memorial Airport in nearby Mattoon, according to the National Transportation Safety Board.
Preliminary information, according to the NTSB, indicated that the plane struck powerlines before crashing.
All of the plane’s occupants were pronounced deceased at the scene, according to the Illinois State Police.
The Coles County Coroner on Sunday evening identified the two men and two women killed in the crash. They are Ross R. Nelson, 46; Raimi A. Rundle, 45; Courtney L. Morrow, 36; and Michael H. Morrow, 48.
All four crash victims were from Menominee, Wisconsin, about 45 miles northwest of Green Bay, according to the State Police.
“My whole house shook,” Kynnedi Goldstein, who lives near the crash site, told ABC News.
Goldstein shared video footage she took in the aftermath of the crash, showing smoke billowing from the wreckage, which was strewn across a field and a two-lane road.
The cause of the crash is under investigation by the NTSB, which sent a team to Trilla on Sunday. The Federal Aviation Administration, which also sent personnel to the crash scene, is assisting in the investigation, the agency said.
The NTSB said the investigation involves three primary areas: the pilot, the aircraft and the operating environment.
As part of the investigation, the NTSB said it will review flight track data, recordings of any air traffic control communications, aircraft maintenance records and weather reports from around the time of the crash.
The agency said it is also reviewing the pilot’s license, ratings and flight experience. The NTSB is also conducting a 72-hour background check on the pilot “to determine if there were any issues that could have affected the pilot’s ability to safely operate the flight.”
The agency said it expects to release a probable cause report on the crash in 12 to 24 months.
(VATICAN CITY) — The process by which a new pope is elected has undergone numerous changes in the nearly two millennia that the Catholic Church has existed, with the current procedure a combination of ancient traditions and modern updates as recent as 2013, reflecting changes instituted by Pope Benedict XVI. Even so, the essential ritual has remained largely unchanged for centuries.
Pope Francis’ death sets into motion a series of formalized rites and observances that occur during what is called the interregnum, which begins upon the pontiff’s passing and ends with the election of his successor. The period of time during which the papacy is vacant is known as the sede vacante, Latin for “vacant seat.”
The pope’s death is first ritually verified by the cardinal camerlengo, or chamberlain, who who runs the ordinary affairs of the Vatican city-state during the sede vacante. A traditional nine days of mourning then commences. This includes the pope’s funeral, which per tradition is held within four to six days of his death, after his body lies in state for several days in St. Peter’s Basilica. This also allows global dignitaries and heads of state to pay their respects and attend the funeral.
It’s also during the interregnum that 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, a gathering that typically commences between 15 to 20 days after the pope’s death. The cardinals spend the interregnum housed in private rooms in the Domus Marthae Sanctae — essentially a residence hotel in the Vatican with dining facilities that usually houses visiting clergy and laity. Per tradition, the cardinals are cut off from the outside world, including televisions, phones, computers and newspapers.
The College of Cardinals will cast as many as four ballots in a single day for the next pope, with a two-thirds majority required to elect a pontiff. After each vote, the ballots are burned and smoke is released from the Sistine Chapel’s chimney as a signal to the throngs holding vigil in St. Peter’s Square. Black smoke — fumata nera in Italian — indicates an inconclusive vote, while white smoke — fumata bianca — will signify that a new pope has been elected. If three days pass with no pope elected, voting can be suspended for a day to allow the cardinals time for reflection before the next round of ballots are cast.
Once the College of Cardinals elects a new pope, the candidate is formally asked in the Sistine Chapel if he accepts the election and, if so, to choose his papal name. While popes have the option of keeping their baptismal name, every pope for the last 470 years has chosen to change his name, usually to honor a predecessor and to signal their intention to emulate his example.
The interregnum ends when the newly elected pope makes his first public appearance in his new role, stepping onto the central balcony at St. Peter’s Basilica, overlooking St. Peter’s Square, to bless the gathered crowd there after being introduced by the senior cardinal deacon with the traditional declaration “Habemus papum” – Latin for “We have a pope.”
(VATICAN CITY) — Who was the very first pope? How many popes have there been? Has anyone ever refused the office?
For an institution that has existed for nearly 2,000 years, most people know very little about the papacy and its history. Here are some of the most commonly asked questions – and a few answers you may find surprising.
Who can be pope?
Canon law says any unmarried, baptized male Catholic, clergy or not, is eligible to be pope. That said, only cardinals have been elected for the last 600-plus years, so being considered for the position in this case is very much the result of whom you know.
Who was the very first pope?
The first pope was St. Peter, after whom St. Peter’s Basilica in Vatican City is named. St. Peter wasn’t elected, however, being said by the church to have been appointed by Christ. In fact, all popes were essentially appointed for about the first thousand years; even if the church selected a successor, that selection had to be approved by a secular party or parties – think monarchs, heads of state and other power brokers – a process that made choosing the next pope both fractious and extremely political.
It’s generally accepted that the papal election process as we currently recognize it began with Pope Nicholas II, the 155th pope, who in 1059 issued a landmark bull, or edict, that contained major church reforms, among them giving the sole power of papal election to the College of Cardinals – a responsibility they retain to this day.
How many popes have there been?
Pope Francis, elected in 2013, who died on Monday, was the 266th pope in the Catholic Church’s roughly 2,000-year history, which spans three millennia. However, that count comes with qualifications.
There were nearly 40 popes who were considered to be illegitimate for various reasons, mostly because they were appointed by secular rulers or warring factions within the church itself, and so aren’t officially counted by the Vatican. The last of these so-called antipopes was Felix V, whose roughly nine-and-a-half-year reign ended in 1449.
There also were five interregnums – that is, periods without a pope and no active papal selection process – the first in the late 13th century and the most recent ending in March 1800, totaling 10 years and 50 days.
Has anyone ever rejected being elected pope?
Has anyone ever rejected being elected pope?It’s rare, but it has happened. The first person known to have done so was St. Philip Benizi, in 1271, who reportedly was so opposed to being elected that he ran away and hid until another candidate was chosen. The late 16th century St. Charles Borromeo, one of the few cardinals to be canonized, also refused the papacy, though in less dramatic fashion.
Most recently, when Cardinal Giovanni Colombo, the 76-year-old archbishop of Milan, began receiving votes during the conclave in October 1978, he reportedly made it clear that he would refuse the papacy if elected. Cardinal Karol Józef Wojtyla, Archbishop of Kraków, was ultimately elected pope and took the name John Paul II.
Why do popes change their names, and do they have to?
Short answer? Tradition. In fact, immediately after affirming that he accepts his election, the ceremonial second question a new pope is asked is, “By what name shall you be known?”
That said, no pope is required to change their name upon election, and for more than a thousand years, few did. The first pope to change his name was the Roman-born 56th pope, John II, elected in the year 533, who felt that using his birth name – Mercurius – was inappropriate because of its association with the Roman god Mercury. He chose John II in honor of his predecessor, Pope John I, the 53rd pontiff.
Even so, the practice of choosing a papal name remained inconsistent for the next 1,000 years, with most popes using their baptismal names. Taking a papal name became more common as the centuries passed, with some non-Italian popes doing so for no more complex a reason than to make it something easier for Romans to pronounce.
Pope Marcellus II, elected in 1555, was the last to use his baptismal name. His successor, Giovanni Pietro, chose the papal name Paul IV, and the practice has continued uninterrupted since. The tradition is now seen as a way for the new pope to signal which of his predecessors he will emulate.
However, although most popes select a predecessor’s name, they are not obliged to do so. Pope Francis bucked that tradition when he was elected, instead choosing his name to honor St. Francis of Assisi, the 13th century cleric now celebrated in the church as the patron saint of animals and the environment. Pope Francis said St. Francis inspired him as “the man of poverty, the man of peace, the man who loves and protects creation.”
Interestingly, there have only been two popes to take a double papal name, both of them in the 20th century and both back-to-back. John Paul I was the first to do it, in August 1978, and was also the first to intentionally include the designation ‘the first’ in his papal name. Upon his unexpected death less than two months later, John Paul I’s successor, Karol Wojtyla, chose the name John Paul II to honor him.
What are the most-used papal names?
With 266 popes and 2,000 years of history, there are plenty of papal names from which new popes can choose. There are, however, some clear favorites.
The most popular papal name, by far, is John: 23 popes have taken it. The first was John I, the 53rd pontiff, in 523; the most recent was John XXIII, the 261st pope, elected in October 1958.
In second place is Gregory, with 16 uses, the first in 590 and the most recent in 1831. Benedict is tied for second, also with 16 uses, with the most recent being Pope Francis’ predecessor, Benedict XVI. Some purists, however, insist there were only 15 Benedicts, purposely omitting Benedict X, who was elected in 1058 but later determined to be an antipope and replaced in less than a year by Nicholas II.
Following Gregory and Benedict, there have been 14 Clements, 13 Innocents, 13 Leos, and 12 popes to use Pius. It’s single-digits from there on, with 44 out of 266 papal names used only once. Chief among the single-use names is Peter, being St. Peter, the first pope – a name that, per tradition, is unlikely ever again to be used.
Who was pope for the longest/shortest time?
The church officially recognizes St. Peter, the first pope, as the longest-serving, with at least 34 years. However, many historians dispute that as impossible to verify, and instead say the longest-serving pope was Pius IX, who held the office just shy of 32 years, until his death in February 1878.
The record for shortest time as pope goes to Urban VII, who died of malaria in September 1590 after just 13 days in office.
Who was the youngest/oldest pope?
At 81 years old, Pope Gregory XII was the oldest pope at time of election, in November 1406. The youngest was John XII, who is believed to have been just 18 years old when he was elected in 955 as the 130th pope.
The longest-lived pope, active or former, was Benedict XVI, who resigned the papacy in February 2013 at age 85 and was 95 years old when he died Dec. 31, 2022. Having turned 78 just three days before he was elected pope in April 2005, he also was the fifth-oldest pope in history when he accepted the office.
Of the nine popes who reigned in the 20th century – beginning with Leo XIII, whose papacy ended in 1903 – their average age at the time of election was 65. Of those, John XXIII was the oldest, at 76, and John Paul II the youngest, at 58. The average age of the 62 popes elected since 1400 is 62.4 years. Any age data prior to 1400 is considered largely unreliable.
Bonus fact: Who makes the pope’s clothes?
The liturgical garments – such as robes, stoles and hats – worn by the pope and other Christian church officials are known as vestments. Since 1798, the pope’s vestments have been manufactured by the Gammarelli family tailors in Rome, who first made the garments for Pope Pius VI. They also make off-the-rack liturgical garments for clergy other than the pope, but the election of a new pope requires special attention.
While a new pope is being chosen, the Gammarellis prepare three sets of vestments in small, medium and large sizes so they will be ready to be worn immediately by the new pope, who makes his first public appearance within hours of election. Once he’s elected, the Gammarellis make bespoke vestments for him, though the pontiff has the option of obtaining his vestments elsewhere if he so chooses.
Despite the care taken, those ready-to-wear initial papal vestments didn’t always do the trick. Pope John XXIII, who was five feet, six inches tall and weighed close to 200 pounds when elected in 1958, donned the small-size vestments by mistake for his first public appearance, requiring attendants to slit them up the back so that they appeared to fit from the front. Conversely, the athletic Pope John Paul II – five feet, ten inches tall and broad-shouldered – is said to have barely been able to fit into the large-sized vestments for his first public appearance.
ABC News’ Phoebe Natanson contributed to this report.
(VATICAN CITY) — Pope Francis, whose time as head of the Catholic Church was noted for an everyman humility and outreach efforts to people of disparate backgrounds and faiths, has died at 88, the Vatican has confirmed.
“At 7:35 this morning, the Bishop of Rome, Francis, returned to the house of the Father. His entire life was dedicated to the service of the Lord and His Church,” Cardinal Kevin Farrell said on Monday.
Pope Francis was hospitalized for just over five weeks beginning in February 2025 to address what the Vatican initially said was a respiratory tract infection, for which he began receiving treatment. Four days after his hospitalization, the Vatican revealed that Francis had been diagnosed with bilateral pneumonia.
The pontiff’s health remained precarious in the ensuing weeks, including a “prolonged” asthmatic respiratory crisis that the Vatican said required doctors to administer him supplemental oxygen, as well as transfusions to address low blood platelets, which are cells that circulate in the blood and help it clot. He also experienced two episodes of “acute respiratory failure” in early March, according to the Vatican, that required “noninvasive mechanical ventilation” at night to help him breathe.
Pope Francis was released from the hospital and returned to the Vatican on March 23, where his physicians said he would require additional months of recovery. Two weeks later, he made his first public appearance since his discharge from the hospital, sitting in a wheelchair while using supplemental oxygen as he briefly greeted people in St. Peter’s Square. He also made an appearance on Easter Sunday from the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica, following a earlier meeting with Vice President JD Vance.
Pope Francis was said to be alert and aware throughout the health episodes and occasionally posted messages on X, acknowledging the good wishes sent his way.
“I would like to thank you for your prayers, which rise up to the Lord from the hearts of so many faithful from many parts of the world,” Francis posted on March 2. “I feel all your affection and closeness and, at this particular time, I feel as if I am ‘carried’ and supported by all God’s people.”
Four days later, the pope offered his first public comments since his hospitalization in the form of a recorded audio message in Spanish that was played in St. Peter’s Square.
“I thank you from the bottom of my heart for your prayers for my health from the Square, I accompany you from here,” the pope said. “May God bless you and the Virgin protect you. Thank you,”
Pope Francis’ respiratory health was a lifelong issue for him; he had part of one lung removed at age 21 because of a respiratory infection. As he grew older, he began to experience gastrointestinal issues that led to a section of his colon being surgically removed in 2021 because of intestinal inflammation. He also began using a wheelchair and cane in 2023 because of strained knee ligaments and a small knee fracture that made walking and standing difficult.
As the leader of the Catholic Church, Francis captured the imaginations of believers and non-believers alike, with his populist style giving the church’s message of social justice far greater resonance than that of many of his predecessors.
Argentinian-born Jorge Mario Bergoglio became the Catholic Church’s 266th pope and the first ever from Latin America. He took the name Francis after the well-known St. Francis of Assisi, who ministered to the poor.
Like his namesake, the pontiff earned a reputation for living a humble life and eschewing the pomp of his predecessors. While Pope Benedict XVI had a flair for papal fashion, Francis chose the simple white cassock with few embellishments for everyday wear. When he was elected pope on March 13, 2013, he didn’t send an aide to pay his hotel bill in Rome, but took care of it himself.
He was also arguably more approachable than his predecessors, known to pose with tourists for selfies and for allowing children join him on the popemobile during his weekly public audience in the square. He once welcomed a child with Down syndrome to sit next to him, and held her hand while he delivered a speech.
Francis also chose not to live in the ornate papal apartments, preferring instead to reside with others in the simple quarters of the Vatican guest house. Rather than travel in a limousine, he made a point of traveling about in smaller, more ordinary vehicles when leaving the Vatican and on his trips.
He reached out to those on the margins of society, and to Catholics who felt alienated by church doctrine.
First Latin American pope
Jorge Mario Bergoglio was born on Dec. 17, 1936, in Buenos Aires, Argentina, one of five siblings. His father was an Italian immigrant employed as a railway worker, while his mother was the Argentine-born daughter of Italian immigrants.
Stricken with a lung infection as a teenager, Bergoglio ultimately had part of his right lung removed at age 21. He went on to hold various odd jobs, including working as a bouncer at a club, sweeping floors, and running tests in a chemical laboratory, before deciding to join the Jesuit order in 1958, becoming a priest just shy of 12 years later.
The same sense of social justice he embodied as Pope Francis can be traced back to when the pontiff was the archbishop of Buenos Aires. He made a name for himself then by reportedly leading a simple life – preparing his own meals, living in a spartan apartment and riding public transportation – eschewing the luxurious lifestyle typically associated with his position.
As archbishop of Buenos Aires, Francis in 2012 notably criticized priests who refused to baptize children born out of wedlock.
“They are the hypocrites of today,” said Francis. “They turn God’s people away from salvation. And that poor girl who could have sent her child back to the sender but had the courage to bring him into the world goes on pilgrimage from parish to parish to have him baptized.”
Outreach as pope
From the start, Pope Francis’ tenure was marked by a more populist ministry than that of his predecessors, demonstrated both by his outreach to groups traditionally ignored or criticized by the church, and his broader efforts to reform and contemporize the church itself.
On his first trip after becoming pope, Francis chose symbolically to travel to the tiny Italian island of Lampedusa, in southern Italy, one of the first points of entry into Europe for poor and desperate refugees and migrants from North Africa, who risk their lives to make the crossing in often unsafe vessels. He also used his first Christmas address as pontiff to call on people to “place ourselves at the service of the poor, make ourselves small and poor with them.”
In a February 2016 mass delivered on the U.S.-Mexico border, and with anti-immigrant sentiments on the rise, the pope called for people in the U.S. and around the world to keep “open hearts” regarding immigrants fleeing violence and poverty in their homelands.
With the church under broadside criticism for sex-abuse scandals involving prominent clergy, Pope Francis both met with and apologized to sex abuse victims, calling them “heralds of mercy” and acknowledging that the church had failed them, declaring, “God weeps.”
Francis also criticized the church itself for what he called its obsession with issues including same-sex marriage, abortion and contraception, although he stopped short of challenging the church’s traditional positions on them.
When a journalist asked him a question about gay priests on his first foreign trip in 2013, just four months after his election, Francis stunned people with his response: “If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge?”
As recently as August of 2023, Francis reiterated in comments during World Youth Day in Portugal that the Catholic Church is for “everyone,” including LGBTQ+ people, although they were still excluded from the sacraments. The following December, Francis approved a Vatican declaration titled “On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings” which noted that, while the church’s official policy remained opposed to same-sex marriage, “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.”
Health problems
Pope Francis’ respiratory health was a lifelong issue for him; he had part of one lung removed at age 21 because of a respiratory infection. As he grew older, he began to experience gastrointestinal issues, including a bout of diverticulitis that led to a 10-day hospital stay in July 2021, during which time a section of his colon was surgically removed. He also began using a wheelchair and cane in 2023 because of strained knee ligaments and a knee fracture that made walking and standing difficult.
On a flight home from a trip to Canada in July 2022, where he had been using a wheelchair, Francis hinted he would have to slow down future travels and maybe resign one day.
“This trip was a bit of a test. It’s true you can’t do trips in this state, maybe we have to change a bit the style, reduce, pay the debts of the trips that I still have to do and reorganize,” Francis said.
He added that “the door is open” for him to resign if he couldn’t carry on.
Even so, Francis continued traveling in 2023, with a total of five trips that year despite increasing health issues.
In January of 2023, then-86-year-old Pope Francis revealed his diverticulitis had returned but was being managed. The following March, he was hospitalized for three days with acute bronchitis.
“I am touched by the many messages received in these hours and I express my gratitude for the closeness and prayer,” Francis wrote on Twitter at the time.
In June of 2023, Francis was back in the hospital, where he underwent three hours of abdominal surgery to address intestinal blockages caused by scarring from previous surgeries. That following November, the Vatican announced that the pontiff had developed a “pulmonary inflammation that has caused some breathing difficulties,” and for which he was being treated with intravenous antibiotics. He subsequently canceled a planned trip to attend a climate conference in Dubai.
Pope Francis’ health continued to be an issue into 2024, prompting the cancellation of some events in late February of that year due to what the Vatican press office described as “mild flu symptoms,” which also saw him visit Rome’s Gemelli Hospital for what the Vatican called “diagnostic tests.”
In January 2025, the Vatican announced that Francis had injured his arm in a fall at his residence, suffering “a bruise to his right forearm, without fractures.” The Pope was seen using a soft sling to support his arm in a photograph released by the Vatican.
Pope Francis continued to experience respiratory issues and was admitted to the hospital on Feb. 14, 2025 for what the Vatican described as “necessary tests” and was subsequently diagnosed with a respiratory tract infection, also according to the Vatican, for which he began receiving treatment. Four days later, the Vatican revealed that Francis had been diagnosed with bilateral pneumonia, for which he was receiving “additional drug therapy.”
“Thank you for the affection, prayer and closeness with which you are accompanying me in these days,” the pope posted on X on Feb. 16.
Pope Francis subsequently suffered a “prolonged” asthmatic respiratory crisis on Feb. 22, according to the Vatican, that required doctors to administer him supplemental oxygen, and that he remained in critical condition. Francis had also received transfusions to address low blood platelets, the Vatican said.
What happens next
A nine-day period of mourning is expected to be observed. The Pope’s funeral will be held after his body lies in state for public viewing in St. Peter’s Basilica.
During this time, 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, a gathering that typically commences between 15 to 20 days after the pope’s death.
The cardinal-electors will cast as many as four ballots in a single day. Black smoke from the Sistine Chapel’s chimney will indicate an inconclusive vote, while white smoke will signify a new pope has been elected.
The new man chosen to lead the Catholic Church will then prepare to make his public debut at the central balcony at St. Peter’s Basilica.
ABC News’ Christopher Watson contributed to this report.
The American Civil Liberties Union’s lead attorney described to ABC News the rapid pace of legal action that led to the extraordinary ruling from the Supreme Court early Saturday morning that blocks the Trump administration from deporting Venezuelans to a prison in El Salvador.
Lee Gelernt said the ACLU began to learn Thursday night that the migrants could be moved from a detention center in Texas as early as that night, so they filed in the middle of the night.
“We just kept pushing and ended up filing in multiple courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, at 1 a.m. on Friday night, early Saturday morning, stopped the removals,” Gelernt said in an interview with ABC News. “But it was touch and go for a long time.”
The ACLU says migrants held in the Texas detention center received a notice and were told they’d be removed in 12 to 24 hours.
“Under the Alien Enemies Act, you have been determined to be an alien enemy subject to apprehension, restraint and removal from the United States,” the notice reads, which was filed in court by the ACLU.
The document is written in English and says migrants can make a phone call, although it does say the notice will be read to the individual in a language they understand. It did not include any method to contest the order.
“The government is providing only 12 to 24 hours with a notice that was served in English that does not explain that people have the right to contest, nor tell them how to do it or how much time they have to do it,” Gelernt said. “There is no argument whatsoever that these notice procedures comply with the Supreme Court’s directive.”
The girlfriend of one of the migrants held in the detention center told ABC News he received a document that appeared to be the same one that the ACLU filed in court. She says he told her it was hard to understand.
She added that he said he and a group of detainees were taken to an airport near the facility on Friday and they were about to be deported. Then, he told her, once they arrived, an officer informed the group they were being sent back to the center and would not board the plane.
Gelernt said the stakes couldn’t be any higher and that Kilmar Abrego Garcia — the Salvadoran native living Maryland who was deported in March to a mega-prison in his home country — isn’t the only person who was “erroneously” sent to the notorious CECOT mega-prison in El Salvador.
“They’re unilaterally claiming that people are members of a gang, but not giving them the opportunity to go into court and show they’re not. And we know that multiple, multiple people have been erroneously tagged as members of this gang, but once they get to the El Salvadoran prison, they may never get out for the rest of their life,” Gelernt said.
“It’s critical that we give them hearings before we take such an extraordinary action,” he added.
The American Civil Liberties Union’s lead attorney described to ABC News the rapid pace of legal action that led to the extraordinary ruling from the Supreme Court early Saturday morning that blocks the Trump administration from deporting Venezuelans to a prison in El Salvador.
Lee Gelernt said the ACLU began to learn Thursday night that the migrants could be moved from a detention center in Texas as early as that night, so they filed in the middle of the night.
“We just kept pushing and ended up filing in multiple courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, at 1 a.m. on Friday night, early Saturday morning, stopped the removals,” Gelernt said in an interview with ABC News. “But it was touch and go for a long time.”
The ACLU says migrants held in the Texas detention center received a notice and were told they’d be removed in 12 to 24 hours.
“Under the Alien Enemies Act, you have been determined to be an alien enemy subject to apprehension, restraint and removal from the United States,” the notice reads, which was filed in court by the ACLU.
The document is written in English and says migrants can make a phone call, although it does say the notice will be read to the individual in a language they understand. It did not include any method to contest the order.
“The government is providing only 12 to 24 hours with a notice that was served in English that does not explain that people have the right to contest, nor tell them how to do it or how much time they have to do it,” Gelernt said. “There is no argument whatsoever that these notice procedures comply with the Supreme Court’s directive.”
The girlfriend of one of the migrants held in the detention center told ABC News he received a document that appeared to be the same one that the ACLU filed in court. She says he told her it was hard to understand.
She added that he said he and a group of detainees were taken to an airport near the facility on Friday and they were about to be deported. Then, he told her, once they arrived, an officer informed the group they were being sent back to the center and would not board the plane.
Gelernt said the stakes couldn’t be any higher and that Kilmar Abrego Garcia — the Salvadoran native living Maryland who was deported in March to a mega-prison in his home country — isn’t the only person who was “erroneously” sent to the notorious CECOT mega-prison in El Salvador.
“They’re unilaterally claiming that people are members of a gang, but not giving them the opportunity to go into court and show they’re not. And we know that multiple, multiple people have been erroneously tagged as members of this gang, but once they get to the El Salvadoran prison, they may never get out for the rest of their life,” Gelernt said.
“It’s critical that we give them hearings before we take such an extraordinary action,” he added.
The American Civil Liberties Union’s lead attorney described to ABC News the rapid pace of legal action that led to the extraordinary ruling from the Supreme Court early Saturday morning that blocks the Trump administration from deporting Venezuelans to a prison in El Salvador.
Lee Gelernt said the ACLU began to learn Thursday night that the migrants could be moved from a detention center in Texas as early as that night, so they filed in the middle of the night.
“We just kept pushing and ended up filing in multiple courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, at 1 a.m. on Friday night, early Saturday morning, stopped the removals,” Gelernt said in an interview with ABC News. “But it was touch and go for a long time.”
The ACLU says migrants held in the Texas detention center received a notice and were told they’d be removed in 12 to 24 hours.
“Under the Alien Enemies Act, you have been determined to be an alien enemy subject to apprehension, restraint and removal from the United States,” the notice reads, which was filed in court by the ACLU.
The document is written in English and says migrants can make a phone call, although it does say the notice will be read to the individual in a language they understand. It did not include any method to contest the order.
“The government is providing only 12 to 24 hours with a notice that was served in English that does not explain that people have the right to contest, nor tell them how to do it or how much time they have to do it,” Gelernt said. “There is no argument whatsoever that these notice procedures comply with the Supreme Court’s directive.”
The girlfriend of one of the migrants held in the detention center told ABC News he received a document that appeared to be the same one that the ACLU filed in court. She says he told her it was hard to understand.
She added that he said he and a group of detainees were taken to an airport near the facility on Friday and they were about to be deported. Then, he told her, once they arrived, an officer informed the group they were being sent back to the center and would not board the plane.
Gelernt said the stakes couldn’t be any higher and that Kilmar Abrego Garcia — the Salvadoran native living Maryland who was deported in March to a mega-prison in his home country — isn’t the only person who was “erroneously” sent to the notorious CECOT mega-prison in El Salvador.
“They’re unilaterally claiming that people are members of a gang, but not giving them the opportunity to go into court and show they’re not. And we know that multiple, multiple people have been erroneously tagged as members of this gang, but once they get to the El Salvadoran prison, they may never get out for the rest of their life,” Gelernt said.
“It’s critical that we give them hearings before we take such an extraordinary action,” he added.
