On social media, Pope Leo XIV has shared criticism of Trump and Vance over policies
President Donald Trump has wished the new pope well in his role, calling Leo's election 'such an honor for our country.' But it comes days after Trump posted an artificial intelligence-generated image of himself dressed as pope amid days of official mourning for Pope Francis. That act raised eyebrows at the Vatican and was denounced by former Italian Premier Romano Prodi as indecent political interference in matters of faith.
And last month, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops announced the end of a half-century of partnerships with the federal U.S. government to serve refugees and migrant children, saying the 'heartbreaking' decision followed the Trump administration's abrupt halt to funding.
The majority of Leo's posts on the X platform are related to or in support of Catholic news and church initiatives. He rarely writes original content, but a look back through his social media timeline shows numerous posts sharing viewpoints opposed to moves aimed at restricting acceptance of migrants and refugees in the U.S.
Leo has recently criticized U.S. Vice President JD Vance
Vance, a convert to Catholicism, is the most high-profile Catholic in American politics. He's drawn attention from the man who now leads the global church, prompting Leo to return to X after a nearly two-year absence to share criticism of the vice president's views.
In early February, Leo shared an article from a Catholic publication with the headline, 'JD Vance is wrong: Jesus doesn't ask us to rank our love for others.'
It came days after Vance — in discussing critiques of the Trump administration's immigration policies — in a Fox News interview had referenced a Christian tenet 'that you love your family and then you love your neighbor, and then you love your community, and then you love your fellow citizens, and then after that, prioritize the rest of the world.'
In response to online criticism of his position, Vance posted on X, 'Just google 'ordo amoris.' Aside from that, the idea that there isn't a hierarchy of obligations violates basic common sense.'
'Ordo amoris,' a historic Catholic tenet, translates to 'order of love.'
Ten days after his initial post, Leo shared another piece from a Jesuit publication, titled, 'Pope Francis' letter, JD Vance's 'ordo amoris' and what the Gospel asks of all of us on immigration.'
Prior to his first February post, Leo had been dormant on X since July 2023.
After Leo's election Thursday, Vance posted congratulations on X, adding, 'I'm sure millions of American Catholics and other Christians will pray for his successful work leading the Church. May God bless him!"
His last post before becoming pope was critical of the Trump administration
The pope's final post as Cardinal Robert Prevost was a recirculation on April 14 of a post by church chronicler Rocco Palmo about Trump's Oval Office meeting with El Salvador President Nayib Bukele.
Bukele said it was 'preposterous' for his country to bring a Maryland man who was wrongly deported there in March back to the U.S., despite a Supreme Court ruling calling on the administration to 'facilitate' Kilmar Abrego Garcia's return.
Leo reposted Palmo's link to an article by Washington-area Bishop Evelio Menjivar — who was born in El Salvador — asking, 'Do you not see the suffering? Is your conscience not disturbed? How can you stay quiet?'
His sharing of critiques dates back nearly a decade
As Trump's campaign ramped up in July 2015, Leo posted to X a Washington Post op-ed by Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the archbishop of New York, with the headline, 'Why Donald Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric is so problematic.'
In the wake of Trump's first election in 2016, Leo reposted a homily in which Los Angeles Archbishop José Gomez — characterizing the fear among many, including schoolchildren who 'think the government is going to come and deport their parents, any day now" — said that America is 'better than this.'
Days later, Leo also posted an article by a Catholic outlet quoting Democrats as saying that, in her loss, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton 'ignored pro-lifers at her own peril.'
In September 2017, months into Trump's first term, Leo recirculated a post by author-activist Sister Helen Prejean saying she stands 'with the #Dreamers and all people who are working toward an immigration system that is fair, just, and moral.'
He also reposted church chronicler Rocco Palmo's piece with the teaser, 'Saying Trump's 'bad hombres' line fuels 'racism and nativism,' Cali bishops send preemptive blast on DACA repeal.'
___
Meg Kinnard can be reached at http://x.com/MegKinnardAP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
4 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Billionaire Ambani Becomes Collateral Damage in Trump Trade Fury
Back in January, India's richest man and his wife were in Washington, attending a pre-inauguration dinner thrown for Donald Trump. In a photograph of the event shared by Reliance Industries Ltd., all three beam for the camera. Seven months on, the US President is locked in a bitter trade skirmish with India, and Reliance boss Mukesh Ambani is caught in the crossfire.
Forbes
4 minutes ago
- Forbes
India Remains Corruption Hotspot As U.S. Enforcement Recalibrates
Earlier this month, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) declined to prosecute Boston-based Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, closing an investigation into bribery by its Indian subsidiary but requiring the company to 'disgorge' nearly $4.7 million in profits, which will be given to the U.S. government. The decision is significant for two reasons. It is the first public Foreign Corrupt Practices (FCPA) resolution since the Trump administration's early-2025 pause on such cases. Trump's DOJ grounded its decision in its recently revised Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy ('CEP'), providing clear criteria for the government to decline to bring charges against a company. Second, it underscores the simple reality that India continues to be a high-risk jurisdiction for businesses operating there in terms of corruption—and no changes in Washington have made the risks go away altogether. The Bribery Scheme The Liberty Mutual case reflects the Trump administration's unique approach to FCPA prosecutions. According to the DOJ, Liberty General Insurance paid roughly $1.47 million to officials at six state-owned banks in India over a five-year period in exchange for customer referrals, disguising the payments as marketing expenses and routing them through third parties. The scheme generated more than $9 million in revenue. Liberty Mutual discovered the problem during an internal investigation and disclosed it to the DOJ in March 2024. Doing so proved decisive. The DOJ emphasized that Liberty Mutual's early reporting was critical to its decision not to prosecute. The Department described the company's cooperation as 'full and proactive.' Its remediation included a thorough root-cause analysis, a reorganization to strengthen legal and compliance resources and new restrictions on how employees use messaging applications for business purposes. The Department cited all these factors in its decision. By declining prosecution, the DOJ avoided bringing criminal charges against the company. But by requiring disgorgement, it signaled that foreign bribery still carries real costs, even in an enforcement environment where prosecutions appear to have become more selective. FCPA Enforcement Under Trump II Liberty Mutual's is the first case decided under the Trump administration's revised enforcement guidelines. In June, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche announced that tghe DOJ would focus FCPA cases on conduct that had implications for U.S. national security and competitiveness or involved serious transnational crimes. The early-2025 pause in foreign bribery cases, combined with new enforcement criteria, led many to assume the FCPA was dormant, if not dead, under the Trump administration. That assumption was misplaced. The Liberty Mutual resolution shows the Department of Justice is still pursuing corporate misconduct abroad, even as it recalibrates how those cases should be resolved. What has changed is the path to resolution. The updated Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy now gives companies clear guidelines: disclose early, cooperate fully, remediate credibly and avoid aggravating circumstances. Then criminal prosecution can be taken off the table. But the DOJ's insistence on disgorgement makes equally clear that declinations are not exonerations. Companies will still surrender profits earned through the misconduct, preserving deterrence while rewarding transparency. Corruption Risks In India This matters in markets like India, where corruption is structural and persistent. India ranks behind only China and Brazil in the number of corporate FCPA resolutions since 2015, spanning sectors from insurance and healthcare to defense and infrastructure. That reality has not changed even if Washington's approach to enforcement has. The Liberty Mutual case is the latest reminder of the structural challenges of operating in India. The company joins a long list of companies whose Indian operations have triggered U.S. enforcement. In 2011, spirits company Diageo paid more than $16 million to settle charges that its Indian subsidiary made illicit payments to Indian government officials. In 2012, Oracle paid more than $2 million to settle charges that its Indian subsidiary structured transactions with phony vendors to create slush funds for potential bribes. In 2017, Mondelez resolved allegations that its Indian unit used a consultant to bribe government officials for licenses. In 2018, Stryker Corporation paid a penalty related in part to misconduct in India, where improper payments were disguised as discounts and marketing expenses. The nature of the Indian market puts companies at risk. State-owned entities dominate critical sectors of the economy from banks and insurers to energy and healthcare. That means routine business dealings often involve individuals classified as 'foreign officials' under the FCPA, greatly expanding exposure. Business development is frequently referral-driven, creating incentives to curry favor with gatekeepers at public institutions. Heavy reliance on intermediaries makes oversight challenging and regulatory complexity adds further pressure, encouraging the temptation to make improper payments. These risks are not theoretical: they are embedded in the operating environment. That is why India repeatedly appears in enforcement dockets and why it remains a priority jurisdiction for compliance and risk officers. What It Means for Business The practical message of the Liberty Mutual case is twofold. First, FCPA enforcement is alive under Trump. It may look different with fewer prosecutions and more reliance on disgorgement and voluntary disclosure incentives, but companies cannot assume that risk has vanished. The DOJ has shown that even amid political skepticism about the statute, it will still act where misconduct is clear. Second, India continues to pose serious corruption risk to companies operating there. Special, locally informed compliance controls are indispensable. These include deeper due diligence on intermediaries, close scrutiny of marketing and promotional spending and rigorous oversight of referral arrangements with public-sector actors. Without these, companies operating in India continue to confront a perilous environment in terms of the temptations of corruption—and the risk of getting caught.
News24
4 minutes ago
- News24
Trump administration should release its 100 000 pages on Jeffrey Epstein, judge says
The Trump administration should release its Jeffrey Epstein files rather than ask the courts, ruled a US judge. The government has 100 000 pages, compared to the 70-odd grand jury pages, said Judge Richard Berman. Berman said that the Trump administration's motion appeared to be a diversion. A US judge said on Wednesday that the Trump administration is in a better position than federal courts to release materials that would satisfy public curiosity about the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking case. In rejecting the Justice Department's bid to unseal records from the grand jury that indicted Epstein in 2019, Manhattan-based US District Judge Richard Berman wrote that the 70-odd pages of materials the grand jury saw paled in comparison to the 100 000 pages the government had from its Epstein investigation but was not releasing. The judge said the bid to persuade him to unseal the records was an apparent distraction from the Justice Department's decision in July not to release its files and directly cited another judge's decision earlier this month not to release similar materials from the grand jury that indicted Epstein's longtime girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell. 'The instant grand jury motion appears to be a 'diversion' from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the Government's possession,' Berman wrote. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Berman's decision came as US President Donald Trump has faced criticism from his conservative base of supporters and congressional Democrats over the Justice Department's decision not to release the files from its Epstein investigation. Epstein died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges. He had pleaded not guilty. His death in jail and his friendships with the wealthy and powerful sparked conspiracy theories that other prominent people were involved in his alleged crimes and that he was murdered. Trump, a Republican, had campaigned for a second term in 2024 with promises to make public Epstein-related files, and accused Democrats of covering up the truth. But in July, the Justice Department declined to release any more material from its investigation of the case and said a previously touted Epstein client list did not exist, angering Trump's supporters. To try to quell the discontent, Trump in July instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek court approval for the release of grand jury material from Epstein's case. READ | Trump's name appears in Jeffrey Epstein files - but it's 'fake news' says White House Evidence seen and heard by grand juries, which operate behind closed doors to prevent interference in criminal investigations, cannot be released without a judge's approval. Justice Department investigations typically collect more material than prosecutors ultimately present to grand juries. Some of that evidence is sometimes eventually disclosed to the public during criminal trials. The Justice Department does not routinely disclose its evidence in cases where a defendant pleads guilty or, like Epstein, never faces trial, but it would not require judicial approval to release such materials. The grand jury that indicted Epstein heard from just one witness, an agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and saw a PowerPoint presentation and call logs, Berman wrote. READ | Under pressure, Trump urges Bondi to release 'whatever she thinks is credible' on Jeffrey Epstein On 11 August, a different Manhattan-based judge, Paul Engelmayer, denied the Justice Department's request to unseal grand jury testimony and exhibits from Maxwell's case, writing that the material was duplicative of public testimony at her 2021 trial. Jared Siskin/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence following her conviction for recruiting underage girls for Epstein. 'A member of the public, appreciating that the Maxwell grand jury materials do not contribute anything to public knowledge, might conclude that the Government's motion for their unsealing was aimed not at 'transparency' but at diversion - aimed not at full disclosure but at the illusion of such,' Engelmayer wrote. Maxwell had pleaded not guilty. After losing an appeal, she asked the US Supreme Court to review her case.
