Brazilian Mother’s Right to Homeschool to Be Argued Before State Court

  • Brazilian local authorities prosecuted Regiane Cichelero for homeschooling her son and threatened to remove him from her custody if she continued.  
  • Oral arguments for her case will be heard at the highest court in the state of Santa Catarina; ADF International coordinating defense, highlighting international human rights protections for homeschooling. 

Santa Catarina, BRAZIL (30 June 2025) —  On July 1 the highest court in the state of Santa Catarina will hear oral arguments for the case of Regiane Cichelero, a Christian mother in Brazil who was prosecuted for homeschooling her son. ADF International is supporting her legal defense, which challenges the state’s attempt to penalize parents for exercising their right to direct their children’s education, a right firmly protected under international human rights law. 

Cichelero began homeschooling her son in 2020 after public schools closed during the COVID-19 pandemic. When schools reopened, she continued teaching him at home, believing it to be the best choice for providing quality education in accordance with her family’s religious values.  

Following her decision to homeschool, local authorities fined her over $20,000 USD, and a judge threatened to remove her son from her custody if she did not enroll him in a public school.  

No parent should fear state punishment for choosing to homeschool their child.egiane made a lawful and conscientious decision to teach her son at home. We are hopeful that the court will affirm her rights and take an important step toward protecting parental rights in Brazil."

- Julio Pohl, Legal Counsel for Latin America at ADF International

“No parent should fear state punishment for choosing to homeschool their child,” said Julio Pohl, ADF International’s Legal Counsel for Latin America, which is supporting Cichelero’s legal defense. “Regiane made a lawful and conscientious decision to teach her son at home. We are hopeful that the court will affirm her rights and take an important step toward protecting parental rights in Brazil.” 

Background

Over 70,000 children are currently homeschooled in Brazil. International human rights law protects the rights of parents to make choices concerning the type of education that their children receive.  

Article 26.3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that, “parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children”. In addition, Article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights holds that states must respect the right of parents “to choose for their children schools, other than those established by the public authorities, which conform to such minimum educational standards as may be laid down or approved by the State and to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions”.    

Leading up to her court date, Cichelero stated, “It is my role as a mother to provide the best education I can for my son. The state’s decision to penalize me has made it difficult to fulfill that duty. But I look forward to this hearing, and I am hopeful for a decision that affirms the right of parents to direct their children’s education. No parent in Brazil should fear the risk of fines or even of losing custody of their child simply for making the best choice for their family.”  

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

US Supreme Court Upholds State Law Protecting Children from Gender-Ideology Experiments  

  • High Court sides with Tennessee law that regulates harmful drugs, surgeries attempting to “transition” children
     
  • Ruling in United States v. Skrmetti will help protect 26 similar state laws

WASHINGTON (18 June 2025) – In a landmark victory for children’s health and science-based medicine, the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday upheld Tennessee’s law protecting minors from harmful and life-altering drugs and surgeries. The ruling in United States v. Skrmetti will help protect 26 similar state laws and return common sense to America’s medical system. 

The Court held that Tennessee’s Senate Bill 1, a bipartisan law passed in 2023, is constitutional. The law prohibits health care providers from providing puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones or potentially irreversible surgeries to encourage children to live as the opposite sex.  

"States are free to protect children from the greatest medical scandal in generations—and that’s exactly what states like Tennessee have done."

- Kristen Waggoner, CEO and President, Alliance Defending Freedom

The ruling signals that American states have broad constitutional authority to ban dangerous so-called “gender transition” procedures and interventions for minors, and it aligns the U.S. with a growing international movement to protect youth from gender ideology.  

“No one has the right to harm a child,” said Alliance Defending Freedom CEO and President Kristen Waggoner. “The Biden administration and ACLU asked the court to create a ‘constitutional right’ to give children harmful, experimental drugs and surgeries that turn them into patients for life. This would have forced states to base their laws on ideology, not evidence—to the immense harm of countless children. The court’s rejection of that request is a monumental victory for children, science, and common sense. States are free to protect children from the greatest medical scandal in generations—and that’s exactly what states like Tennessee have done.”  

Tennessee’s law is “plainly rationally related” to the state’s findings that administering puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to minors with gender dysphoria “can lead to the minor becoming irreversibly sterile, having increased risk of disease and illness, or suffering from adverse and sometimes fatal psychological consequences,” the court wrote in its opinion. The law is also rationally related to “the State’s objective of protecting minors’ health and welfare.” 

Background

Currently, 26 states, in addition to Tennessee, have enacted comparable laws in the U.S to protect children from gender-ideology experiments. The High Court decided to review the case United States v. Skrmetti after the Biden administration appealed a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit that upheld Tennessee’s law. ADF filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the Supreme Court in October 2024, urging it to let state legislatures protect children from these experimental medical procedures.    

The Court’s decision follows a global shift toward dismantling gender ideology. In the United Kingdom, the closure of London’s Tavistock Clinic and the publication of the Cass Review signaled a clear rejection of gender ideology experimentation on young people. As highlighted in an amicus brief to the Court from 17 international parental rights organisations, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway, Italy, Hungary, and Slovakia are among the list of European countries that have taken legislative, judicial, or administrative steps to protect minors from gender ideology. In Latin America, Chile moved to ban gender “transition” for children in May, following bans in Argentina and Brazil. 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

‘Surveillance and control’: Experts convene at European Parliament to warn about EU online censorship law, following US State Department expressing concern

  • First-of-its-kind, cross-party event, co-hosted by politicians and ADF International, examined threats to free speech posed by Digital Services Act (DSA)
  • Journalist and best-selling author Rod Dreher, a friend of US Vice President JD Vance, said the VP loves Europe but opposes the continent’s censorial ruling class
  • Pressure on DSA builds, following US State Department expressing concern over censorial impact of the law

Brussels (21 May 2025) – Experts this morning warned about the threats of an EU online censorship law, in a first-of-its-kind, cross-party convening at the European Parliament.

The well-attended conference, which was co-hosted by ADF International, and Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) Stephen Bartulica and Virginie Joron, was entitled “The Digital Services Act and Threats to Freedom of Expression”.

The event followed the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, & Labour, a bureau within the US State Department, expressing concern about the censorial impact of the Digital Services Act (DSA).

At the event, which was attended by MEPs and staffers from across the political spectrum, think-tankers, journalists and others, Ms Joron warned that although the DSA was meant to create a “safe online environment”, it has “morphed into a tool that risks undermining our fundamental freedoms”.

She added: “What was sold as the Digital Services Act is increasingly functioning as a Digital Surveillance Act. The European Commission, alongside some parliamentarians, has seized upon the DSA as a political tool to control speech, particularly targeting platforms like X, Facebook, and Telegram.

“The DSA was meant to protect our digital space, not to control it… The DSA, once a shield for our rights, risks becoming a Trojan horse for surveillance and control.”

Mr Coleman, an international human rights lawyer specialising in free speech and Executive Director of ADF International, a Christian legal organisation that defends freedom of expression, told the conference: “Free speech is again under threat on this continent in a way it hasn’t been since the nightmare of Europe’s authoritarian regimes just a few decades ago.

“The internet is the frontline of this assault on free speech in Europe—particularly through the Digital Services Act.”

He added that “serious questions can and should be raised” about whether the DSA is compatible with “binding obligations to protect freedom of expression”.

He commented from his position of legal expertise that it was his “strong view” that “it is not”. 

In his speech, Mr Bartulica warned that “hate speech”, which politicians want to use the DSA to “address”, is “impossible to define” as a legal concept.

He said quoting Christian Scripture could even be considered “hate speech” by those in power.

Mr Coleman mentioned the case of Finnish parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen, which is supported by ADF International, in his speech, as a “harrowing example of what censorship under the DSA could look like in practice”. 

He said: “Six years ago, Päivi posted a picture of a Bible verse and expressed her Christian views on sexuality on X. She was criminally prosecuted for alleged ‘hate speech’ and has been unanimously acquitted in two trials. 

“But the state prosecutor has appealed the case again. And shockingly, her case—in which she faces trial for posting online—is now pending before Finland’s Supreme Court.

“Now, under the DSA, deeply problematic national laws restricting speech—like the “hate speech” legislation used to prosecute Päivi —could be broadly applied across the EU by this simple principle: If it’s considered illegal in one place, it could be in every place.”

Mr Bartulica also said that in the EU “we have regulated or controlled speech and not free speech”.

He added: “We don’t have to reinvent the wheel—we’ve seen where mass censorship leads. Under communism and other totalitarian regimes, it’s not a pretty picture.

“There’s a totalitarian impulse in many of these people in Brussels, who are just waiting to censor speech they don’t like.”

JD Vance opposes Europe’s censorial ruling class

Also speaking at the event was American journalist and bestselling author Rod Dreher.

Mr Dreher, who is a friend of US Vice President JD Vance, said that following the Vice President’s speech in Munich, that people had asked him if VP Vance hates Europe.

He said: “Of course” the VP does not hate Europe—he loves it enough to speak the truth about its censorship crisis.

But Mr Dreher did say the VP opposes Europe’s censorial ruling class.

Mr Dreher observed that “elites would prefer to suppress discussion of discontent and its sources”—smearing such discussion as „hate speech“—rather than acknowledge the serious problems plaguing their societies.

Drawing on the wisdom of Soviet dissidents, he recommended that in the face of “soft totalitarianism” in the West today that people „refuse to participate in any event where one cannot speak the truth… Prepare to suffer for the truth”.

How to oppose the DSA

In his speech, Mr Coleman also gave concrete ways in which the DSA can be opposed.

He said: “It is thankfully the case that freedom of expression is guaranteed in Article 11 of the EU Charter, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

“According to these and the jurisprudence of the ECHR, any limitations to free speech must be proportionate and necessary in a democratic society.

“And so, serious questions can and should be raised about whether the DSA is compatible with these binding obligations to protect freedom of expression. 

“It is my strong view, as you may have guessed from this speech, that it is not. So, what can be done about this?

“Member states could initiate an action for annulment before the Court of Justice of the European Union. Through this, the whole or parts of the DSA could be declared inapplicable, if they are deemed to infringe on the EU Charter or Treaties.

“The same question, of considering whether the DSA is compatible with binding obligations to protect free speech, is key for the upcoming DSA review, in which the Commission must evaluate the act in view of other legal commitments. 

“It is imperative that every opportunity is taken in the review, which must occur by mid-November this year, to raise concerns about the censorial impact of the DSA. 

“This could be accomplished through written or oral questions to the European Commission and even by inviting Commissioner Henna Virkkunen to discuss the legislation in the European Parliament. After all, if the Commissioner is as in favour of freedom of expression as she claims to be, why would she refuse?

“It is vital to include representatives of civil society, tech companies and digital rights groups in such conversations, as they can share their invaluable expertise on this important issue.

“As elected representatives of your people, you are also in an excellent position to bring the public’s attention to the grave risks to free speech posed by the DSA. 

“The truth is that every single European’s rights are jeopardised by this legislation. The more the public is aware of and speaks out about this, the more pressure the Commission will feel. And the more likely we are to defeat this law.”

Background

Today’s conference was the first of its kind in the European Parliament to focus on the threats to free speech posed by the DSA, to offer concrete answers on how to oppose them, and to discuss the fundamental importance of freedom of expression for societal flourishing, in that context.

The gathering of free speech experts adds to steadily building pressure on the DSA, following a letter reportedly sent to the European Commission last week by the US House Judiciary Committee, expressing concern over the legislation.

Henna Virkkunen, the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, also met with Congressman Jim Jordan, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, in Washington DC last week.

In a post on X, she said: “Candid exchange with @Jim_Jordan [Chairman Jordan].”

She went on to claim in the post: “Freedom of speech is a fundamental right in the EU and is strongly protected by our digital rules. Happy to continue our good discussion.”

Earlier this month, the US Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor expressed concern over the censorial impact of the DSA.

The State Department bureau posted on X: “The Department of State is deeply concerned about efforts by governments to coerce American tech companies into targeting individuals for censorship. Freedom of expression must be protected – online and offline.

“Examples of this conduct are troublingly numerous. EU Commissioner Thierry Breton threatened X for hosting political speech.”

The post continued: “Türkiye fined Meta for refusing to restrict content about protests; and Australia required X to remove a post criticizing an individual for promoting gender ideology.

“Even when content may be objectionable, censorship undermines democracy, suppresses political opponents, and degrades public safety. The United States opposes efforts to undermine freedom of expression. As @SecRubio [Marco Rubio] said, our diplomacy will continue to place an emphasis on promoting fundamental freedoms.”

The Digital Services Act

EU politicians have stated their desire for the DSA to “address’ so-called “mis” and “disinformation” online—vague and subjective terms, which experts have warned can be used to justify censorship.

The regulation would provide an incentive to put pressure on tech companies, including American ones, to censor speech, rather than risk massive financial penalties for non-compliance.

There are additional concerns in the US about the DSA potentially having an extraterritorial impact and being used to censor speech inside America.

An attempt at using the regulation to censor speech in the US was seen last summer, when former Commissioner Thierry Breton warned Elon Musk to not breach the DSA ahead of his X interview with then-Presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Find more information on the DSA here.

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Experts to convene at European Parliament to warn about EU online censorship law, following US State Department expressing concern

  • First-of-its-kind, cross-party event, co-hosted by politicians and ADF International, to examine threats to free speech posed by Digital Services Act (DSA)
  • Event, also featuring journalist and best-selling author Rod Dreher, to take place on morning of Wednesday, May 21
  • Pressure on DSA builds, following US State Department expressing concern over censorial impact of the law

BRUSSELS (19 May 2025) – Experts will convene at the European Parliament this Wednesday morning to warn about the threats of an EU online censorship law, in a first-of-its-kind, cross-party event.

The event, which is co-hosted by ADF International, is entitled “The Digital Services Act and Threats to Freedom of Expression”.

It follows the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, & Labour, a bureau within the US State Department, expressing concern about the censorial impact of the Digital Services Act (DSA).

The DSA is an EU regulation that requires online platforms, including US tech companies such as X and Meta, to remove “illegal content”, or risk facing massive financial penalties.

There are concerns it could introduce a “lowest common denominator” of censorship, as the most egregious anti-speech laws in any individual EU country could be applied across the region under the act.

Croatian Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Stephen Bartulica, who will speak at the event, said: “Pressure against the Digital Services Act is quickly building both inside and outside the European Parliament.

“Concern from the United States, including from their State Department and Congress, over the censorial impact of the DSA should not be ignored by the Commission—the US is a vital ally of Europe.

“This event will be a crucial part of continuing to build pressure on the DSA. Online censorship in Europe must be rejected. I believe in free speech, not regulated speech.”

Paul Coleman, Executive Director of ADF International, and an international human rights lawyer specialising in free speech, who will also speak at the event, said: “The DSA is one of the most serious threats to online free speech in the digital age.

“The move towards censorship in Europe through this framework is deeply concerning and must be challenged.

“We cannot accept a transatlantic divide on free speech, where the US recommits to the protection of this fundamental freedom, while Europe tramples on it. Freedom of expression must be protected and upheld across the globe.”

Another speaker at the event, French MEP Virginie Joron, said: „The DSA has become a tool that elites want to use to control the internet, in a desperate attempt to censor narratives that go against their narrative.

„This truth is becoming increasingly clear to the world. The new DSA regulation must not become a political tool.

„This event comes at an important moment and is a crucial step in the fight against the misapplication of this regulation.”

This week’s conference is being hosted by European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) MEP Mr Bartulica, PfE MEP Ms Joron and ADF International, a Christian legal organisation, with expertise in international law, that defends free speech.

Pressure builds against Digital Services Act

The gathering of free speech experts will add to steadily building pressure on the DSA, following a letter reportedly sent to the European Commission last week by the US House Judiciary Committee, expressing concern over the legislation.

Henna Virkkunen, the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, also met with Congressman Jim Jordan, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, in Washington DC last week.

In a post on X, she said: “Candid exchange with @Jim_Jordan [Chairman Jordan].“

She went on to claim in the post: „Freedom of speech is a fundamental right in the EU and is strongly protected by our digital rules. Happy to continue our good discussion.”

Earlier this month, the US Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor expressed concern over the censorial impact of the DSA.

The State Department bureau posted on X: “The Department of State is deeply concerned about efforts by governments to coerce American tech companies into targeting individuals for censorship. Freedom of expression must be protected – online and offline.

“Examples of this conduct are troublingly numerous. EU Commissioner Thierry Breton threatened X for hosting political speech.”

The post continued: “Türkiye fined Meta for refusing to restrict content about protests; and Australia required X to remove a post criticizing an individual for promoting gender ideology.

“Even when content may be objectionable, censorship undermines democracy, suppresses political opponents, and degrades public safety. The United States opposes efforts to undermine freedom of expression. As @SecRubio [Marco Rubio] said, our diplomacy will continue to place an emphasis on promoting fundamental freedoms.”

This Wednesday’s conference is the first of its kind in the European Parliament to focus on the threats to free speech posed by the DSA, offer concrete answers on how to oppose them, and discuss the fundamental importance of freedom of expression for societal flourishing, in that context.

Rod Dreher, an American journalist and bestselling author, will also speak at the event. His books include ‘The Benedict Option’, ‘Live Not By Lies’ and, most recently, ‘Living in Wonder’. He is also a Visiting Fellow at the Danube Institute think tank.

Email [email protected] to secure your place at this groundbreaking event.

The Digital Services Act

EU politicians have stated their desire for the DSA to “address’ so-called “mis” and “disinformation” online—vague and subjective terms, which experts have warned can be used to justify censorship.

The regulation would provide an incentive to and put pressure on tech companies, including American ones, to censor speech, rather than risk massive financial penalties for non-compliance.

There are additional concerns in the US about the DSA potentially having an extraterritorial impact and being used to censor speech inside America.

An attempt at using the regulation to censor speech in the US was seen last summer, when former Commissioner Thierry Breton warned Elon Musk to not breach the DSA ahead of his X interview with then-Presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Find more information on the DSA here.

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Chile’s Congress Calls for Immediate Suspension of “Gender Transition” Programs for Children 

  • Chamber of Deputies adopts groundbreaking report calling for the immediate suspension of “gender transition” programs for minors and a full legislative overhaul in Chile 
  • Investigatory commission found off-label use of puberty blockers, lack of parental consent, and public funding for unapproved medical interventions in children 

SANTIAGO (16 May 2025) – In a landmark move, Chile’s Chamber of Deputies has adopted the findings of a Special Investigatory Commission calling for the immediate suspension of government programs that promote the medicalized transition of minors.

The Commission’s report was adopted on Thursday by the majority of the deputies present in the Chamber. It details systemic medical, legal, and ethical failings in the state’s handling of children and adolescents who experience gender-related distress. 

““Chile has become the first country in Latin America to confront the harms of the gender-affirming model through a democratic process."

- Tomas Henriquez, ADF International Director of Advocacy for Latin America

 

“Chile has become the first country in Latin America to confront the harms of the gender-affirming model through a democratic process. Congress has taken a courageous step in protecting children from the irreversible dangers of so-called ‘gender transition’,” said Tomás Henríquez, Director of Latin America Advocacy for ADF International. 

„The Commission found that programs like PAIG – Crece con Orgullo and the Trans Health Program (PST) have operated as a pipeline to irreversible medical interventions, including puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for children as young as ten, without scientific basis, regulatory oversight, or parental consent.“

The report highlights the following major findings: 

  • Children as young as three years old were referred for gender identity programs. 
  • 1,716 minors were identified as recipients or in line for hormone therapies in 2023 alone. 
  • None of the drugs used—including GnRH analogues—have been approved by Chile’s public health regulator for gender dysphoria in children. 
  • Parental consent procedures were absent or inconsistent, and some interventions proceeded without it. 

The report states: 

“It is clear that the current programs, under the guise of accompaniment, have operated as a gateway to irreversible medical and hormonal transition for children, without the necessary scientific, ethical, or legal safeguards.” 

 It further states: 

“The therapeutic indication of these treatments in minors lacks adequate evidence and carries high risks. The principles of medicine—primum non nocere (first, do no harm)—have been disregarded.” 

 The report calls for: 

  • Immediate suspension of the PAIG and PST programs 
  • A ban on hormonal and surgical interventions for all minors 
  • Legislative reform of Chile’s Gender Identity Law to restore parental rights and restrict access 
  • Referral to the Public Prosecutor’s Office for possible criminal violations 

It is widely expected that the Congress will now move to legislatively bar the use of puberty blockers, cross sex hormones, and so-called surgical transitioning for minors. 

The report follows last year’s vote introducing an amendment to ban the use of public funds for “gender transitioning” of children. That amendment was later struck down by the Constitutional Court over separation of powers grounds, but this vote reveals a consolidated majority of lawmakers in favor of restricting “gender transition” for minors. 

 Henríquez added: 

“This is a turning point—not only for Chile, but for the entire region, in the disavowal of the lie of gender ideology. Lawmakers have listened to the evidence, the science, and the voices of parents. The so-called gender-affirming model is collapsing globally, and Chile is now leading Latin America toward a more responsible and ethical approach to gender dysphoria in youth.” 

The report mirrors international developments such as the UK’s Cass Review, which concluded that the so-called “gender-affirming approach” lacks an evidence base and places children at risk. It also follows the release of the US Department of Health and Human Services Gender Dysphoria Report in April. 

ADF International has urged Chilean authorities to implement the Commission’s recommendations without delay and to ensure that all children receive compassionate, evidence-based psychological support without being steered toward dangerous life-altering medical procedures. 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

PICTURED: Tomas Henriquez