Articles of Faith: What Do Latter-day Saints Believe About the Atonement of Jesus Christ? 4

Article of Faith 3

We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved,

by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

This is the fourth essay about the Atonement of Jesus Christ as stated in the third Article of Faith of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The first week, I discussed the importance of understanding how the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ, as the third pillar of eternity, is essential to Heavenly Father’s plan for the eternal happiness of His children. The second week, the discussion was about the Atonement of Jesus Christ and the nature of the atonement. Last week, the discussion concerned the Atonement of Jesus Christ as a vicarious sacrifice. This week, the discussion will be about Christ’s sacrifice being voluntary and love-inspired, using the words of Elder James E. Talmage (Articles of Faith [1913], 79-81).

Christ’s Sacrifice Was Voluntary and Love-Inspired – We have noted in passing that Christ gave His life willingly and voluntarily for the redemption of mankind. He had offered Himself, in the primeval council in heaven, as the subject of the atoning sacrifice made necessary by the foreseen transgression of the first man; and the free agency shown and exercised in this, the early stage of His saving mission, was retained to the very last of the agonizing fulfilment of the accepted plan. Though He lived on earth a man in every particular that concerns us in our regard for Him as an example of godliness in humanity, yet it is to be remembered that, though born of a mortal mother, he was begotten in the flesh by an immortal Father; and so combined within His being the capacity to die, and the power to hold death indefinitely in abeyance. He gave up His life; it was not taken from Him against His will. Note the significance of His own declaration: “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.” On another occasion Jesus testified of Himself in this way: “For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of Man.” Amidst the tragic scenes of the betrayal, when one who had been a professed follower and friend gave Him with a traitorous kiss to His persecutors, and when Peter, with a rashness prompted by personal zeal, drew and used the sword in His defense, the Master said: “Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?” And on to the bitter end, marked by the expiring though triumphant cry “It is finished,” the incarnated God held in subjection within Himself the power to thwart His torturers had He so willed.

The motive inspiring and sustaining Him through all the scenes of His mission, from the time of His primeval ordination to the moment of victorious consummation on the cross, was twofold: first, the desire to do His Father’s will in accomplishing the redemption of mankind; second, His love for humanity, of whose welfare and destiny He had assumed charge. [Emphasis added.] Far from cherishing the least feeling of vindictiveness against those who put Him to death. He entertained for them compassion to the last. Hear Him in the hour of extreme agony, praying aloud: “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” Not less is the Father’s love, as shown by His accepting the Son’s offer and permitting Him whom He delighted to call His Beloved to suffer as only a God could suffer: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved.” Further, we hear the teaching of the apostle, whom the Savior loved so well: “In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.”

  

What Did Supreme Court Decide about Program to Verify Citizenship?

The U.S. Supreme Court decided on Friday that the Department of Homeland Security could continue its program to verify citizenship. According to Fred Lucas at The Daily Signal, the shadow docket ruling was 6-3 in the case of DHS v. League of Women Voters allowing “the Trump administration to expand the program that allows states to use Social Security records and other information to check voters’ citizenship status.” 

“By prohibiting interference with the disclosure of information regarding citizenship status to DHS – ‘notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law’ – Congress necessarily authorized DHS to request and receive that information,” the majority opinion says.

The three liberals, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented.

The majority held that a 1996 federal law banning noncitizen voting likely authorizes DHS to obtain citizenship information from other agencies, including state agencies.

A shadow docket ruling is a Supreme Court order, often issued on an expedited basis without full oral arguments.

“In 1996, Congress, however, separately and expressly authorized DHS to request and receive information relating to citizenship and immigration status from other agencies, including SSA, in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (HRIRA),” the majority opinion says.

Plaintiffs, led by the League of Women Voters, argued this could violate privacy rights. They also argued that the SAVE database, short for Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, is unreliable and risks purging eligible voters.

In June, U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan of the District of Columbia ruled that a portion of President Donald Trump’s March 2025 executive order on election integrity was unlawful.

Earlier this month, a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel denied the administration’s motion to stay the district court ruling pending appeal in a 2-1 ruling.

The case centered on a partnership between the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration to expand the SAVE database. The expansion allowed agencies to search individuals using Social Security numbers, aggregate large amounts of data, and function as a citizenship verification tool to screen voter eligibility.

 

Who Is Nick Freitas?

My VIP for this week is Nick Freitas who is documenting the decline of the American identity. In his article, Rob Bluey, president and executive editor of The Daily Signal, reports on Freitas’ documentary. 

For his documentary, Freitas traveled to Britain where he documents the transformation there, “driven by decades of mass Muslim migration and a political class unwilling to demand assimilation.” He claims that Americans ignore the transformation of Britain “at their own peril.” The following information comes from Bluey’s article.

Asked how a nation is demoralized and destabilized, Freitas has a simple answer.

“In the simplest terms, you give it an identity crisis,” he told me. “And I think we’re suffering that in the West in general, and we’re starting to see it become a significant problem in the United States.”

A Clash of Worldviews

Freitas embarked on the project because he cares deeply about his own country’s future. He decided to visit Britain given its shared heritage with the United States.

In the United Kingdom, mass migration from Muslim countries has tested the country’s traditions and reshaped its culture.

“I’m not talking about difference in dress or festivals or food,” Freitas said. “I’m talking about diametrically opposed views on the fundamental components of what builds a high-trust society.”

Those components, he explained, are political, social, theological, and economic. When migrants arrive with “no genuine interest in assimilating,” he warned, the result is “ultimately destructive.”

Nowhere is that clearer than in Britain’s grooming gang scandal, the film’s most heart-wrenching segment. Freitas said the overwhelming majority of the men who organized the abuse were Pakistani. Yet British police were reluctant to pursue them because they feared being called Islamophobic.

“That should just absolutely baffle us,” Freitas said. “But on the other side, we should start to recognize how far America has gone down this path.”

What Americans Can Do

In its promotion of the film, Heritage is blunt about the stakes: What mass Islamic immigration did to Britain could happen here if Americans don’t act now.

Freitas said America can change course, and he believes it starts close to home. His advice: Vote in primaries, where he estimates only 7% to 8% of voters participate. And parents shouldn’t assume their local public school reflects their values, even in a conservative community with good teachers.

“The teachers don’t select the curriculum,” he said.

Instead, Freitas urges parents to teach their kids the real history of the United States, ensuring they pass that inheritance to the next generation. That, he said, is the surest way our country doesn’t follow the Britain’s path….

The film’s message ultimately comes down to Freitas’ plea to value “the truth over comfort.” Britain didn’t. America still can.

 

 

Is Congress Checking Trump?

The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday concerns the separation of powers outlined by the U.S. Constitution between the executive and legislative branches of the federal government. Pundits say that President Donald Trump rolled over Congress. James Curry, professor of political science at the University of Notre Dame who specializes in Congress and U.S. policymaking, thinks the story is wrong. 

Curry shared the following thoughts on the topic in an article published in the Deseret News. He suggests that Americans should look past the headlines to see a different picture and gives three examples to show how the legislative branch is checking the executive branch.

1. Pushing back on nominees

Consider the president’s efforts to reshape the executive branch. In 2025, while Elon Musk’s DOGE efforts dominated the news, the Republican-led Senate was quietly blocking a record number of the president’s nominees. There were no dramatic floor votes. The nominations simply sat until the White House gave up and pulled them.

Trump withdrew 57 executive branch nominations in 2025… Every withdrawn nomination is a fight the president lost without anyone seeing a punch thrown.

2. Pushing back on mass layoffs

Congress also put a halt to the aggressive workforce reductions that characterized the first several months of the second Trump administration. Through layoffs, buyouts and early retirements, the administration pushed out more than 200,000 federal employees in the first 10 months of 2025.

Then Congress stepped in. The November 2025 bill ending the longest government shutdown in American history barred agencies from any further mass layoffs while it was in effect, and lawmakers have kept up that pressure in legislation since.

By March 2026, the government was hiring again, bringing back workers who had left and restaffing agencies that had been gutted. The exceptions tell the story. USAID and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting stayed dead because Congress itself voted to kill them.

3. Pushing back on aggressive spending cuts

Congress has also done more to push back on the Trump administration’s efforts to unilaterally slash federal spending than it may seem. In 2025, the administration cut funding for science and health research, foreign aid, clean energy, and more.

Through the appropriations process, however, Congress has put much of it back. Despite DOGE, federal spending actually rose from 2024 to 2025, and most programs are funded at roughly Biden-era levels.

The cuts that stuck are mostly the ones Congress approved. That is exactly how the Constitution says spending decisions should be made.

Congress has moved to check President Donald Trump in other ways as well. It put an end to the president’s $1.8 billion “weaponization” fund, which would have funneled money to his political allies. Democratic and Republican senators refused to back Trump’s SAVE Act, which would have allowed the Trump administration unprecedented influence over who can and cannot vote in federal elections. And this summer, Congress passed the largest housing affordability bill in decades with broad bipartisan support, despite opposition from President Donald Trump.

Curry explained that the pushback goes unnoticed because “presidents and Congress move at different speeds. A president can act with the stroke of a pen. Congress has 535 members, two chambers and no single voice. It acts by holding coalitions and passing laws, which takes months, sometimes years.”

Curry continued by explaining that the president has weeks, months, or years to push his plan before Congress responds, and the topic is already old news. “But those slow, quiet moves are the system working as designed. The separation of powers was never meant to be an alarm with tripwires. Congress responds through legislation, and it responds in proportion to what voters demand.” He stated that the “system is alive and well. We just have to know where to look.” 

What Have You Lost or Broken?

My Come Follow Me Studies for this week took me to Isaiah 13-35 in a lesson titled “A Marvellous Work and a Wonder.” The following material introduced the lesson. 

One thing that the Lord asks prophets to do is to warn about the consequences of sin. For Old Testament prophets, this often meant telling the rulers of mighty kingdoms that they needed to repent. It was a dangerous task, but Isaiah was fearless, and his warnings to the kingdoms of his day—including Israel, Judah, and surrounding nations—were bold (see Isaiah 13-23).

However, Isaiah also had a message of hope. Even though the prophesied destructions did come upon these kingdoms, Isaiah foresaw a chance for restoration and renewal. The Lord would invite His people to return to Him. He would make “the parched ground … become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water” (Isaiah 35:7). He would perform “a marvellous work and a wonder” (Isaiah 29:14), restoring to Israel the blessings He had promised them. Neither Isaiah nor anyone else alive at that time lived to see this marvelous work. But we are seeing it today. In fact, we are part of it.

The scripture block taught several principles, including these: (1) Pride and worldliness will fail (Isaiah 13:1-11, 19-22; 14:1-20). (2) Jesus Christ is the promised Messiah (Isaiah 22:22-23; 24:21-23; 25:6-8; 26:19; 28:16). (3) Turning away from the Lord brings spiritual danger (Isaiah 24:1-12; 28:1-8; 28:1-8; 29:7-13; 30:8-14). (4) The Lord can restore what is lost or broken (Isaiah 29; 30:18-26; 35). This essay will discuss principle #4 about God restoring anything lost or broken.

The lesson material asks several questions about lost or broken things: “Have you ever lost something that you thought you would never find again? Or maybe something broke, and you worried that it could never be repaired.” God is concerned about our possessions and used some of them to teach parables, such as the “Parable of the Lost Coin.” He is also concerned about the lost or broken relationships in our lives. He is particularly concerned about our relationship with Him, but He is also concerned about our relationships with other people.

When we sin or turn away from God, Satan wants us to think that we are lost and can never return or be healed. This is a lie. Sister Amy A. Wright taught the following about broken relationships with God ("Christ Heals That Which Is Broken," Liahona, May 2022, 81–84). 

While the Savior was teaching in the temple, a woman was brought to Him by the scribes and Pharisees. We do not know her full story, just that she was “taken in adultery” (John 8:4). Often the scriptures give only a small portion of someone’s life, and based on that portion, we sometimes tend to exalt or condemn. No one’s life can be understood by one magnificent moment or one regrettable public disappointment. The purpose of these scriptural accounts is to help us see that Jesus Christ was the answer then, and He is the answer now. He knows our complete story and exactly what we suffer, as well as our capabilities and vulnerabilities.

Christ’s response to this precious daughter of God was “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more” (John 8:11). Another way to say “go, and sin no more” could be “go forth and change.” The Savior was inviting her to repent: to change her behavior, her associations, the way she felt about herself, her heart.

Because of Christ, our decision to “go forth and change” can also allow us to “go forth and heal,” for He is the source of healing all that is broken in our lives. As the great Mediator and Advocate with the Father, Christ sanctifies and restores broken relationships – most important, our relationship with God.

The Joseph Smith Translation makes it clear that the woman did follow the Savior’s counsel and changed her life: “And the woman glorified God from that hour, and believed on his name” (JST, John 8:11 [in John 8:11, footnote c]). It is unfortunate that we do not know her name or other details about her life after this moment because it would have required great determination, humility, and faith in Jesus Christ for her to repent and change. What we do know is she was a woman who “believed on his name” with the understanding that she was not beyond the reach of His infinite and eternal sacrifice.

God is also concerned about our relationships with other people: parents, siblings, children, and other family members; friends and associates; strangers who cross our path. Sister Wright taught the following about broken relationships with other people.

In Luke chapter 15 we read a parable of a man who had two sons. The younger son asked his father for his inheritance, took his journey into a far country, and wasted his substance with riotous living.

“And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want.

“And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine.

“And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat; and no man gave unto him.

“And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father’s have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger!

“I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee.

“And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants.

“And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him.”

The fact that the father ran to his son, I believe, is significant. The personal hurt that the son had inflicted upon his father was surely deep and profound. Likewise, the father may have been genuinely embarrassed by his son’s actions.

So why didn’t the father wait for his son to apologize? Why didn’t he hold out for an offering of restitution and reconciliation before extending forgiveness and love? This is something I have often pondered.

The Lord teaches us that forgiving others is a universal commandment: “I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men.” Extending forgiveness can take tremendous courage and humility. It can also take time. It requires us to put our faith and trust in the Lord as we assume accountability for the condition of our hearts. Here lies the significance and power of our agency.

With the depiction of this father in the parable of the prodigal son, the Savior emphasized that forgiveness is one of the noblest gifts we can give one another and most specifically ourselves. Unburdening our hearts through forgiveness isn’t always easy, but through the enabling power of Jesus Christ, it is possible.

God will help us to return to Him and be healed. He will also help us to mend the broken or lost relationships in our lives. Isaiah teaches, and the Book of Mormon confirms, the Restoration of His Gospel to the earth through the Prophet Joseph Smith. (See Isaiah 29:13-14; 30:18-26; 35.)  An important part of that restoration was the translation and publishing of the Book of Mormon – Another Testament of Jesus Christ. Isaiah calls the Restoration “a marvellous work and wonder” (Isaiah 29:14). I invite you to study Isaiah and the Book of Mormon to know how much God loves you wants you to return to His presence.

 

What Matters Most to You?

Wise parents will teach their children three important matters: (1) agency is given to each mortal before they are born, is part of God’s plan for the eternal happiness of His children, and is essential to making correct choices. (2) Each person needs to choose what is most important to them, and wise people choose Christ every day. (3) No one, besides Christ, can save themselves, and only Christ can perfect us. Such teachings will strengthen families, and strong families strengthen communities, states, and nations.

In her article published in the Deseret News, Amy Ortiz shared her notes from a talk given by Elder Alexander Dushku at a BYU Devotional. Elder Dushku is a General Authority Seventy and General Counsel of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 

When Julius Caesar made the fateful decision to cross the Rubicon River with one of his legions in January 49 B.C., he knew exactly what the act meant.

The crossing was an act of treason that would incite civil war against Rome. Nevertheless, Caesar marched forward, reportedly declaring, “Alez iacta est,” or “the die is cast.”

He clarified that Caesar was no role model, but said that his actions indicate Caesar understood a powerful truth: “The time comes when you and I must choose what matters most to us.”

In a time of great opportunities and great challenges, “now is the time to cross the Rubicon of faith and never look back,” Elder Dushku said. “now is the time to decide to be all in for the Lord.” …

He listed several ways individuals can choose to center their lives around Christ, including:

·       Praying with real intent.

·       Feasting upon Christ’s words in the scriptures.

·       Choosing to repent of sin and return to Christ.

·       Choosing to keep covenants and obey God’s commandments out of love and loyalty.

·       Partaking of the sacrament with a broken heart and a contrite spirit.

·       Choosing to always remember Christ.

·       Choosing to love and serve others in Christ’s name.

Christ’s loving invitations are constant and always personal, Elder Dushku said. The “fundamental choice” each has to face is between Christ and the world.

“When the adversary presses in and temptations come,” he said, “we must remember that we are choosing in that moment what we love most.”

“Choose Christ” daily and in those moments, Elder Dushku pleaded. Choose Christ “because He loved you first, and because you love Him most.”

 

How Much Voter Fraud Happens in US Elections?

The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday concerns election fraud. Democrats try to tell us that there is no election fraud, or fraud does not affect election results because there is not enough of it. Numbers tell a difference story. In an article published in The Daily Signal, Fred Lucas reported some numbers. 

Since late 2025, federal law enforcement has made 160 election fraud arrests and has 10 times as many investigations in motion, senior Trump administration officials said.

“We are investigating several hundred cases that are very much active right now. We are bringing several cases each week,” a Justice Department official told the Daily Signal Tuesday. “But I will say that we have thousands of cases that are in their infancy, where we are receiving public voter files.”

The Daily Signal reported on Monday that the Justice Department has brought about two dozen voter fraud cases in September so far.

Previously, the Daily Signal reported that, as of late August, the second-term Trump Justice Department charged 50 noncitizens for voter fraud in its first one and a half years, compared to 13 such cases brought in the entirely of the Biden administration.

The Justice Department is combining its own internal database and tools and distributing that information to U.S. attorneys’ offices, Homeland Security Investigations field offices, and the FBI.

“What you are seeing right now is stuff that has been in the hopper, and we have been working for a while now,” the Justice Department official said, “We think as the weeks progress, we will see those tranches, just in their infancy, start to really build and come to fruition as well.”

The administration also plans to release numbers on non-prosecutable cases, noting that more than 100,000 people have illegally registered to vote or voted, but the statute of limitations has expired for prosecution.

The uptick in arrests shows federal prosecutors are not just looking the other way on voter fraud, said Chad Ennis, vice president of the Honest Elections Project.

“The DOJ is finally putting the manpower into this. A lot of times, all you have to do is look,” Ennis told the Daily Signal. “Most of these prosecutions have been for in-person voting. In years past, most scattered prosecutions were for mail voting, or ballot harvesting operations.”

A Public Interest Legal Foundation database shows 1,376 elections ended in a tie since 1992, while another 533 were decided by a single vote in that time.

“Are thousands of fraudulent votes happening in one place? No,” Ennis said. “But local elections are more prone to fraud. It’s hard to steal a million votes. It’s not hard to steal 10 votes. Then someone has a city council to steer contracts their way, and it’s a good return on investment.

A Homeland Security Investigations official said the agency is getting leads from across the country, with 1,600 cases in place, and 160 arrests for illegal voting or illegal voter registration.

Articles of Faith: What Do Latter-day Saints Believe About the Atonement of Jesus Christ? 3

Article of Faith 3

We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved,

by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

This is the third essay about the Atonement of Jesus Christ as stated in the third Article of Faith of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The first week, I discussed the importance of understanding how the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ, as the third pillar of eternity, is essential to Heavenly Father’s plan for the eternal happiness of His children. Last week, the discussion was about the Atonement of Jesus Christ and the nature of the atonement. This week, the discussion will concern the Atonement of Jesus Christ as a vicarious sacrifice, using the words of Elder James E. Talmage (Articles of Faith [1913], 77-79).

The Atonement a Vicarious Sacrifice – It is to many a matter of surpassing wonder that the voluntary sacrifice of a single being could be made to operate as a means of ransom for the rest of mankind. In this, as in other things, the scriptures are explicable by the spirit of scriptural interpretation. The sacred writings of ancient times, the inspired utterances of latter-day prophets, the traditions of mankind, the rites of sacrifice, and even the sacrileges of heathen idolatries, all involve the idea of vicarious atonement. God has never refused to accept an offering made by one who is authorized on behalf of those who are in any way incapable of doing the required service themselves. The scapegoat and the altar victim of ancient Israel, if offered with repentance and contrition, were accepted by the Lord in mitigation of the sins of the people. It is interesting to note that while the ceremonies of sacrifice formed so large and so essential a part of the Mosaic requirements, these rites long antedated the establishment of Israel as a distinct people; for, as already shown, altar sacrifice as rendered by Adam. The symbolism of the immolating of animals as a prototype of the great sacrifice to follow on Calvary was thus instituted with the beginning of human history.

The many kinds of sacrifice prescribed by the Mosaic law are classifiable as bloody and bloodless. Offerings of the first order only, involving the infliction of death, were acceptable in propitiation or atonement for sin, and the victim had to be clean, healthy, and without spot or blemish. So for the great sacrifice, the effects of which were to be infinite, only an innocent subject could be accepted,  It was Christ’s right to become the Savior as the only sinless being on earth, and as the Only Begotten of the Father, and above all as the one ordained in the heavens to be the Redeemer of mankind; and though the exercise of this right involved a sacrifice, the extent of which man cannot comprehend, yet Christ made that sacrifice willingly and voluntarily. To the last, He had the means of terminating the tortures of His persecutors, by the exercise of His inherent powers. In some way, though that way may be inexplicable to us, Christ took upon Himself the burdensome onus of the sins of mankind. The means may be to our finite minds a mystery, yet the results are our salvation.

Something of the Savior’s agony as He groaned under this load of guilt, which to Him, as a type of purity, must have been in itself bitter in the extreme, He has told us in this day: “For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I; Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit – and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink – Nevertheless, glory be to the Father, and I partook and finished my preparations unto the children of men.” Further instances of the validity of vicarious service are found in the rites of baptism for the dead as taught in apostolic and modern times, and in the institution of other temple ordinances in the current dispensation.

Do You Think Immigrants Should Be Able to Support Themselves and Family?

Some people are upset at a new federal policy that took effect on Friday. According to an article by Frizz Flake published in the Deseret News, this policy “gives immigration officers broader discretion to consider whether certain immigrants may rely on public benefits.” 

The Department of Homeland Security says the new policy will remove restrictive regulations and allow immigration officers to grant admission on a case-by-case basis.]

“Under @POTUS Trump, DHS is restoring the basic principle that immigrants must be able to support themselves,” the Department of Homeland Security posted on X.

Individuals, advocacy groups and healthcare providers who oppose these changes have raised concerns about the potential negative impact on immigrants and their families, particularly those receiving public benefits such as Medicaid and food stamps.

The public charge test, explained

Ever since Congress passed the Immigration Act of 1882, the U.S. government has classified individuals it believes likely to become dependent on government welfare as a “public charge” and has denied their entry into the United States.

Traditionally, immigration officers considered factors such as age, health and financial status when granting individuals admission into the country.

What has changed?

In 2022, the Biden administration formally defined a public charge as someone who is “primarily dependent on the government for subsistence.”

Under this definition, immigration officers could only consider direct cash assistance when evaluating green card applicants. This primarily included enrollment in programs such as Supplemental Security Income and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.

The new policy, effective Friday, allows officers to weigh a much wider array of factors, including participation in Medicaid, food stamps, housing assistance and financial aid for college.

Possible effects in Utah

Utah is one of only 15 states that uses state revenue to provide health coverage to children regardless of their immigration status. The state argues that covering children preventively is cheaper than treating them in emergency rooms, and healthy children perform better in school and become more productive adults.

Because of the vagueness of the new public charge rule and what qualifies as receiving a public benefit, Utah’s built-in safety net specifically created for children in immigrant families could now count against a parent’s green card application.

This could result in families walking away from state coverage out of fear, resulting in uninsured children and the state of Utah losing the return on its own policy investment.

What Utah families should know

DHS expects the new policy to reduce annual federal and state spending by approximately $13 billion due to immigrant families disenrolling or forgoing enrollment in public benefits programs.

Much of that disenrollment is expected to occur before any green cards are actually denied. Because the new rule doesn’t specify which benefits will count against applicants, the ambiguity itself acts as a deterrent that pushes families to drop coverage.

 

Who Are the Truth Tellers in America?

 My VIPs for this week are the people who tell the truth in a time of great lies. In a podcast with Victor Davis Hanson, Sami Winc introduced the topic – the big lie of the week. The “big lie on the internet this week was that there were black lynchings in the last five or six years.” She continued, “And you looked at every single one of them, and they were ruled as suicides, with the exception of one that was murdered by her own husband.”

In addition to the big lie, Sami introduced the problem of the Left “celebrating [Charlie Kirk’s assassination. They were defending Luigi Mangione and Lindsay Clancy.” Victor Davis Hanson called it the “death cult,” and Winc emphasized the lack of commemoration for the people who died on 9/1. Hanson explained the following: 

And then you have to add [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] and New York City Mayor Zohran] Mamdani laughing during the most solemn parts of the commemoration. This is not the Democratic Party.

This is an Islamic socialist party. And it’s not just these young, dissatisfied, downwardly mobile urban people that supposedly hijacked the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party was socialist before these people came in. Almost everything the socialists are now advocating: pack the court, end the filibuster, end the Electoral College, bring in new states, defund the police, recognize BLM, DEI, biological men in female sports, ban fracking.

That was the Democratic Party. They had gone socialist.

All that’s different is these people, the Abdul El-Sayeds, the Hasan Pikers. They were young, they were glib, they were photogenic, and thy said: You got the great message, but you are … Nobody wants to listen to Nancy Pelosi. Nobody wants to listen to Chuck Schumer. Nobody wants the buffoonish Hakeem Jeffries. We are slick. We can take that message that we both share, and we go to town.

And that’s what they did. And they don’t like the United States. They really do not like it, this socialist Democratic Party. They don’t believe that 9/11 is … And if you think I’m exaggerating, Hasan Piker said that we deserved it. And Ilhan Omar said, “Well, something happened to somebody on that day. Something happened.” So, I’m being literal about it. And they believe that any means are necessary to achieve their morally superior end.

So, if it means to take a middle-class kid that worked himself up for UnitedHealth to provide health care for millions of people, you lay in wait, and you shoot him in the back, and you become a hero, even though you’re a trust-fund, spoiled-rotten nepo baby.

Or you murder your three children, and you don’t say one word, that they were strangled one after another as two of the children saw each sibling murdered in front of them by their mother that was supposed to be nurturing. And then you say, you don’t just feel sympathy for the mother. You make that a cause celeb, and you don’t even mention the children.

Or, in the case of Charlie Kirk, you cut videos where you put your finger to your neck as if you’re shooting him on his commemoration.

And as far as the hoaxes go, we’ve got to remember now that it’s getting late in the game. We went through the Duke lacrosse [scandal]….

Then we had Jussie Smollett. He defied the laws of chemistry. He threw bleach at 30 degrees actual weather temperature with, you know, frigid winds, and it didn’t freeze because he was Jussie Smollette….

At Stanford, we had a rope hanging on a tree, and we were told that somebody, a Stanford student, that was….

We had the NASCAR. Remember the rope on the garage door? That was made up.

In other words, what does it indicate? I could go on with 100 more. It indicates that there are too many victims for the small pool of victimizers, No.1. So, there’s not enough victimizers, so you have to make up psychodramas.

No. 2, it shows you that a lot of people on the 30% DEI ledger feel that if they can continue to pass this lie about white rage, white supremacy, white privilege, they will get a continuance of the gravy train -- $30 to $31 trillion, $23, I think it is, trillion in redistribution since the start of the Great Society….

Affirmative action, DEI, we want this to continue. We are oppressed. We bring in people. They do it in two ways. They bring in people that have no experience with the United States from Latin America, Africa. They set one inch in the United States and they say, “I’m a victim of white supremacy.” And you say, “Well, you grew up in Uganda, you grew up in Kenya, you grew up in Oaxaca. How did you get hurt?” …

There is much more to the article. If you choose, you can find the rest here. 

How Do Americans Find Common Ground and Move Forward Together?

The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday concerns ongoing efforts “to find a better way to embody the love of God in public life, offering hope for unity and a moral framework to move forward in a divided world.”

As part of that ongoing effort, President Dallin H. Oaks, Prophet and President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was invited to speak at the Washington National Cathedral on Wednesday, September 16, 2026. The date was chosen because it was the eve of Constitution Day on Thursday, September 17. 

Professionally, President Oaks “regarded the United States Constitution as a model for a diverse people to achieve self-government.” He joined others in believing that “our history to teach that ‘Creating common ground is a key purpose of the Constitution.’” He continued by stating, “The Constitution requires us to deal constantly with people who disagree with us. It compels a divided people to build coalitions that allow them to act together for the common good.”

Early in his remarks, President Oaks emphasizes that he was speaking for the United States Constitution and not for any political party or pressure group. He spoke from his experience as “a law clerk to Earl Warren, Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, … 15 years as a professor of law and … 3.5 years as a justice on the Utah Supreme Court.” He was also speaking “from 42 years as an Apostle of Jesus Christ, responsible to study the meaning of the divinely inspired principles of the United States Constitution.” Here is President Oaks’ explanation of the inspired principles in the United States Constitution.

What became the United States was founded and built by people of different nationalities, ethnicities, and beliefs. Its unifying purpose was not to establish a particular religion or to perpetuate any of the diverse cultures or tribal loyalties of the old countries. Our founding generation, whom we honor in this 250^th anniversary, sought to be unified by a new constitution and laws. That is not to say that our unifying Declaration and initial Constitution or the then-current understanding of their meanings were perfect. The history of the first two centuries of the United States showed the need for many important changes, such as voting rights for women and, particularly, the abolition of slavery. New laws had to ensure that those who had been enslaved or disadvantaged would have all the conditions of freedom.

Many different groups – political and cultural – needed to participate to resolve the diversities that had separated us. These different groups, included scholars, cultural, civic, and religious organizations, all of which are represented in today’s gathering. Speaking for my own Church, the U.S. Constitution is of special importance to our members. We have a revelation that identifies the Constitution as divinely inspired. This does not mean that every word is inspired, but that it is based on inspired principles. First, is the principle that the source of government power is the citizens – what is often called popular sovereignty. Second, is the division of delegated power between the nation and its subsidiary states. A third inspired principle is the separation of powers among the executive, legislative and judicial branches. Fourth, is the cluster of vital guarantees of individual rights and specific limits on government authority such as in the Bill of Rights. Fifth, we see divine inspiration in the vital purpose of the entire constitution, which is that we are to be governed by law and not by individuals. Our loyalty is based on the Constitution and its principles and processes, not to particular office-holders.

In his closing remarks, President Oaks called for all Americans to become peacemakers. He used the example of the Church of Jesus Christ’s helping hands program in which volunteers in yellow shirts help in clean up efforts after natural disasters and other humanitarian projects worldwide. “In the process, relationships are formed people-to-people that would be impossible by institutional declarations.” He continued:

There is an important lesson in the “helping hands” experience. It is an effort that brings peace to people who are in distress. But it also teaches us the power that comes when individuals put aside their differences and work together to find common ground. When our volunteers bring help, people in distress do not ask for their beliefs. Likewise, the volunteers help everyone, not just fell believers. Why? Simply because deeper moral needs about safety and family and hope take center stage. What is important is giving help and getting help, people-to-people. This is the way to united people who face a common problem. Peacemaking involves finding common ground. A minister who seeks to heal a troubled marriage or resolve a personal controversy is working for peace. Young men and women are peacemakers when they forgo the temporary pleasure of self-gratifying activities and involve themselves in service projects and other acts of kindness. Persons who seek to reduce human suffering and persons who work to promote understanding among different peoples are also workers for peace.

People of goodwill, compassion, and a desire to understand and help one another are at the core of peacemaking and fairness for all in the constitutional process of achieving freedom and unity, as difficult and slow as it is. It is all about trying to understand the deep needs, the deep commitments, on both sides and then to forge solutions that yield peace and fairness for all.

President Oaks closed his remarks with a prayer for all: “I pray to our Heavenly Father for His blessings upon us that we will all seek to be peacemakers.”

 

 

How Can One Understand the Words of Isaiah?

My Come Follow Me studies for this week took me to the first twelve chapters in the book of Isaiah and a lesson titled “God Is My Salvation.” The following information introduced the lesson material. 

Even if this is your first time reading the book of Isaiah, you might find passages that sound familiar. That’s because, of all the Old Testament prophets, Isaiah is the one most often quoted in other books of scripture, including by the Savior Himself. Isaiah’s words also appear often in hymns and other sacred music.

Why is Isaiah quoted so often? Surely one reason is that Isaiah had a gift for expressing the word of God in vivid, memorable language. But it’s more than that. Isaiah has inspired prophets for generations because the truths he taught transcended his own generation (between 740 and 701 BC). He wrote of God’s great work of redemption, which is much bigger than one nation or one time period. From Isaiah, Nephi learned that he and his people, though separated from the rest of Israel, were still part of God’s covenant people. In Isaiah, New Testament writers found prophecies about the Messiah that were fulfilled right before their eyes. And in Isaiah, Joseph Smith found inspiration for the latter-day work of gathering Israel and building Zion. When you read Isaiah, what will you find?

The scripture block teaches numerous principles, including the following: (1) The words of Isaiah will all be fulfilled (Isaiah 1-12). (2) Prophets warn about sin and promise hope through repentance (Isaiah 1; 3-5). (3) God will do a great work in the latter days (Isaiah 2; 4; 11-12). (4) Prophets are called by God (Isaiah 6). (5) God promised to send Jesus Christ to be my Savior (Isaiah 7-9). This essay will discuss principle #1 about the words of Isaiah.

The Book of Mormon – Another Testament of Jesus Christ teaches much about the words of Isaiah. In 3 Nephi 23:3, the Savior taught that “all things that [Isaiah] spake have been and shall be, even according to the words which he spake.” The prophecies of Isaiah can be divided under headings like these: Isaiah’s day, the Savior’s mortal ministry, and The latter days. Many of the prophecies of Isaiah are fulfilled in more than one way. President Dallin H. Oaks taught the following:

The book of Isaiah contains numerous prophecies that seem to have multiple fulfillments. One seems to involve the people of Isaiah’s day or the circumstances of the next generation. Another meaning, often symbolic, seems to refer to events in the meridian of time, when Jerusalem was destroyed and her people scattered after the crucifixion of the Son of God. Still another meaning or fulfillment of the same prophecy seems to relate to the events attending the Second Coming of the Savior. The fact that many of these prophecies can have multiple meanings underscores the importance of our seeking revelation from the Holy Ghost to help us interpret them (“Scripture Reading and Revelation,” Ensign, Jan. 1995, 8). 

Isaiah is written in such a way that many people have difficulty understanding what his words mean. The Savior said, “Search these things diligently; for great are the words of Isaiah”

(3 Nephi 23:1; see also verses 2-3). The following ideas might help in understanding Isaiah:

·       Ponder the symbols and metaphors Isaiah used.

·       Ask yourself, “What am I learning about Jesus Christ?” (see 1 Nephi 19:23).

·       Look for topics that feel relevant to our time.

·       Use study helps, such as a dictionary, the footnotes, chapter headings, and the Guide to the Scriptures.

What Nation Leads the World in Protecting Life and the Family Unit?

Families are stronger when governments are pro-life and pro-family. Strong families strengthen communities, states, and nations. The Geneva Consensus Declaration supports life and family. According to an article by Virginia Grace McKinnon, the main objectives of the declaration “are to secure meaningful health and development gains for women; to protect life at all stages; to defend the family as the fundamental unit of society; and to work together across the U.N. system to realize these values.” 

In 2020, 32 nations signed the Geneva Consensus Declaration….

In 2021, President Joe Biden removed the United States from the declaration, encouraging others to do the same. Rejoining the declaration was one of Trump’s first moves when he came back to office in 2025.

Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., retiring from Congress in January, announced he is passing the torch to Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., to lead the Geneva Consensus Declaration in Congress….

Daines told the Daily Signal it’s important for the United States to be back in the Geneva Consensus Declaration because “the world looks to the U.S.” Daines, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he sees this when he travels the world.

“Everywhere I go, the U.S. is looked up to as the leader in so many areas, economically, militarily, but in this case, fighting and leading on behalf of the pro-life and pro-family movement. So, we are the world’s leader. It’s important that we continue to project that leadership, beyond just the economy, beyond just the military, but on behalf of the pro-life and pro-family unit.”

The nations signing the “Geneva Consensus Declaration gathered on Capitol Hill this week to sign the sixth annual declaration on the sanctity of life and the importance of putting families first.” Because the United States is “this year’s secretariat, Congress and the Institute for Women’s Health hosted 43 member countries standing for the right to life, family, women’s health, and national sovereignty.”

Vince Haley, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council read a letter from President Donald Trump that included the following information:

As the Secretariat, the United States will work closely with our allies and partners to advance the Declaration’s vital mission….

My Administration will always stand for the dignity of human life, the health and well-being of women, the strength of the family, and the right to defend these values and traditions. I commend the work of the Institute for Women’s Health to strengthen this growing coalition. Together, we will carry these principles forward and build a stronger, healthier, and more prosperous future for generations to come.

Why Is Illegal Discrimination in Law Schools Bad for America?

The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday concerns illegal discrimination in law schools.

According to Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell at The Daily Signal, the Department of Justice discovered that the “University of California, Berkeley School of Law illegally discriminated against Asian and white applicants based on race during its 2024 and 2025 admissions processes.” They did this “after the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action.” 

“Berkeley Law School’s deliberate efforts to circumvent the Supreme Court’s decision in [Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard] demonstrate a complete disregard for the rule of law,” said assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division, Harmeet K. Dhillon. “The department will continue to aggressively pursue compliance from schools who attempt to racially manipulate their student bodies in violation of federal law.”

The DOJ opened a compliance review into the University of California, Berkeley in March 2025 to determine if its admissions practices complied with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. The investigation was expanded shortly after to include the university’s law school.

The findings reveal that Berkeley Law uses race, essay prompts, and other tactics to further its admissions diversity goals.

The DOJ is now seeking to enter a voluntary resolution agreement with the law school “to ensure that admissions and oversight practices are brought into legal compliance.”

The admissions application asked applicants to specify their racial identity, so that admitted students could be “grouped” with others of the same “primary identity” in class.

“How will you (your perspective, experience, Voice) contribute diversity in our classrooms and community? Feel free to address any factors or attributes you consider important and relevant. In the past, applicants have included information about characteristics such as: race/ethnicity….” The application asks.

This is exactly what Berkeley Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky said colleges needed to do to maintain diversity quotas after the Students for Fair Admissions Ruling eliminated affirmative action.

“What colleges and universities will need to do after affirmative action is eliminated is find ways to achieve diversity that can’t be documented as violating the Constitution,” Chemerinsky said in a June 2023 article printed in the Los Angeles Times.

The DOJ also reviewed a video of Chemerinsky in 2020 admitting “unstated affirmative action” practices in faculty hiring.

“You can think it, you can vote it, but our discussions are not privileged, so don’t ever articulate that that’s what you’re doing!” he said.

The DOJ’s analysis of admissions data found highly statistically significant racial preferences in 2024 and 2025.

In 2025, black applicants had 5.8 times the odds of admission as comparable white applicants with similar qualifications. In 2024, a black applicant had 6.5 times the odds of admission as a comparable white applicant.

“The Department finds that Berkeley Law deliberately discriminated against Asian and white applicants based on race in its law school admissions. This discrimination is apparent from the significant disparity in objective academic metrics between racially preferred applicants, and applicants from non-preferred races,” the letter to Berkeley reads, adding that the discrimination is “ongoing.”

The DOJ will continue to investigate law schools’ compliance with Title VI.

“Where a violation has been found, the department will engage in settlement negotiations to ensure the school’s admissions practices are brought into compliance,” a press release obtained by the Daily Signal reads. “If those efforts fail, the department will file suit.”

Chemerinsky, the law school dean, told the Daily Signal that the Supreme Court’s ruling doesn’t stop universities from pursuing diversity.

            “University of California, Berkeley School of Law in its admissions decisions scrupulously                     complies with Proposition 209, federal statutes, and the United States Constitution,” he said in a              statement. “Our admissions policy is clear that race is not considered in any way in admissions             decisions. Proposition 209, federal statutes, and the Supreme Court’s decisions do not preclude                schools from pursuing diversity so long as they give no preferences based on race. Berkeley                    Law does not do so.”