Catholic students push a top-tier university to draw the line on porn



The University of Notre Dame may finally be on the verge of blocking access to pornography on its Indiana campus — and not a moment too soon.

When I was a student at Notre Dame in 2019, I met with then-President Rev. John Jenkins to urge him to adopt a campus-wide porn filter. Our student-led campaign had gained thousands of signatures and drawn national media attention, including coverage from Newsweek, the Daily Beast, and ABC’s “Nightline.”

With major corporations distancing themselves from the pornography industry, Notre Dame has even more reason to follow its students’ lead.

I explained to Father Jenkins, an affable priest of the Congregation of Holy Cross, how pornography fuels the trafficking of women and children. But he seemed more concerned about avoiding any attempt to control the behavior of male students who watch porn. His argument? That blocking pornography would deprive students of the chance to build self-control.

Six years later, that argument feels even more out of touch. A growing consensus now recognizes pornography not as a harmless personal vice but as a driving force behind the sexual exploitation of children and the trafficking of women. It’s also bad for the brain.

That change in understanding comes as a new generation of Notre Dame students has launched another effort to convince the university to act. Last month, students introduced a petition urging the university president “to take immediate action to promote a pornography-free campus.” According to the Irish Rover, a conservative student newspaper, more than 600 students have already signed the petition — an impressive showing at a university with only about 9,000 undergraduates.

‘Infested with rape videos’

Public opinion has shifted in recent years thanks in part to a groundbreaking 2020 New York Times article by columnist Nicholas Kristof titled “The Children of Pornhub.” In it, Kristof documented how Pornhub “monetizes child rapes, revenge pornography, spy cam videos of women showering, racist and misogynist content, and footage of women being asphyxiated in plastic bags.”

Kristof’s column shared the stories of young women whose abuse as children had been filmed and profited from by one of the most powerful pornographic websites in the world. Kristof concluded, damningly, that Pornhub “is infested with rape videos.”

The corporate world took notice. In response to Kristof’s exposé, Mastercard, Visa, and Discover all blocked payments to Pornhub to avoid liability for enabling child sexual abuse. Under pressure, Pornhub announced new age-verification policies last year. But the vast majority of pornographic websites still require no such safeguards. Child sexual abuse material remains rampant across “mainstream” platforms.

With major corporations distancing themselves from the pornography industry, Notre Dame has even more reason to follow its students’ lead. Other Catholic institutions already have.

Inspired by our 2019 efforts at Notre Dame, the Catholic University of America passed a student government resolution asking administrators to “prohibit access to the top 200 pornography websites through the campus network.” President John Garvey agreed and honored the request. Franciscan University of Steubenville and Christendom College also maintain similar pornography filters.

Overcoming resistance

Now, with new leadership at Notre Dame, the odds of real action have improved. The Rev. Robert Dowd took office as university president in June.

When I was a student, I had the privilege of learning from Father Dowd. Unlike professors who treat students as interchangeable, Father Dowd made time to meet individually with everyone. His compassion wasn’t confined to the classroom — he also founded the Ford Program in Human Development Studies and Solidarity, which supports research aimed at alleviating poverty in the developing world. Standing against child sexual exploitation would be entirely consistent with both his academic and moral commitments.

But Father Dowd will face institutional resistance. Some administrators fear that blocking porn might make Notre Dame look provincial — unfit to compete with elite secular institutions. Others worry a filter might somehow impinge upon academic freedom.

Both fears are unfounded.

First, Notre Dame can lead the nation by taking a principled stand against an industry that fuels exploitation and abuse. Second, academic freedom can be preserved with basic accommodations. If faculty or students require access to pornography for legitimate research, they can ask Notre Dame’s IT department to lift the filter on their account.

And the technical hurdle? It’s minimal. John Gohsman, Notre Dame’s former vice president for information technology, told Students for Child-Oriented Policy that installing a filter “would be neither technologically difficult nor costly.”

I hope — and fully expect — that Father Dowd will heed today’s students and take meaningful action against the evils perpetuated by the pornography industry.

I’ll end where I began. In 2019, when Father Jenkins refused our request, I said this:

Pornography propagates sexual assault, contributes to the objectification of women, and advances the sexual exploitation of children. I call on Notre Dame to instead stand as a champion for women and children by enforcing the university’s official policy against using pornography on the campus Wi-Fi network.

That call is still waiting for a response. Now is the time.

Legal Complaint Asks Education Department To Probe Alleged Left-Wing GOTV Scheme At Colleges

A former Illinois GOP House candidate filed a legal complaint on Thursday requesting the Education Department investigate several Midwestern colleges for allegedly sharing protected student data with third parties working to boost left-wing get-out-the-vote efforts on university campuses. Brought by Republican Desi Anderson, who unsuccessfully ran for state House in the 2024 election, the complaint […]

The Best Thing Trump Can Do For Teachers And Kids Is Shut Down The Education Department

It’s beyond time to return education decisions to the states and restore local control, giving families more freedom.

Ferris Bueller Never Would Have Made It Past Today’s Obsessive Location Sharing

The world shouldn’t be a panopticon, especially since the last time I checked, this is still America.

America welcomes guests — but not those who want to destroy it



America is the most generous country on Earth. We open our doors, offer opportunities, and welcome those who seek a better life. But make no mistake — this country is a home, not a doormat. If you, as a guest, start trashing the place, don’t be surprised when we show you the door.

Mahmoud Khalil is exactly that — a guest. He’s a green-card holder who led violent, anti-Semitic protests at Columbia University. Labeling what he did as mere “protests” softens the outright hate against the Jewish people and Western civilization that he espoused during his weeks-long standoff.

Green-card holders are not entitled to the same protections as citizens.

The left is accusing President Trump’s decision to revoke Khalil’s green-card status as a violation of his rights while dismissing the critical fact that Khalil is not a citizen — and as such, actions have consequences.

Residents are not citizens

A green card is not a birthright; it is a privilege. It’s a golden ticket invitation to live and work in the United States. But as in Willy Wonka’s chocolate factory, that ticket comes with terms and conditions. If you break the rules, you’re out. It’s not a passport. It’s not citizenship. It’s more like a revocable lease.

Imagine you’re handed the keys to a grand estate. The owners invite you to sit at their table, pour you a glass of wine, and say, “Stay as long as you like. Just honor the house rules.” And yet, rather than showing gratitude, you start smashing windows, tearing down walls, and whispering to others, “This place is awful. It must be destroyed.”

How long before the owner snatches those keys from your hand? And who in their right mind would object? If you threatened to burn down the guest wing, you would be thrown out, and the owner would be right to do so.

Deportations are lawful

Today, we are watching green-card holders — guests in our home — sow chaos, spew hatred, and threaten the foundations of the very country that took them in.

The left is wringing its hands, insisting that these guests have a “right” to do all of those things — which is simply not true. Green-card holders are legal permanent residents, not citizens. In fact, back in 1893, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress could deport noncitizens at will. National sovereignty means we have the power to determine who comes into our house. If someone isn’t a respectful guest, the Supreme Court ruled we can kick them out.

Let’s be clear: Deporting Mahmoud Khalil is not a violation of his rights. He doesn’t have the same protections as U.S. citizens. We have opened our doors, allowing millions to chase their dreams in America. But that welcome comes with an expectation: Don’t destroy what you were invited into. You don’t come into my house and start swinging a hammer at the foundation. You don’t set fire to the roof. And you surely don’t get to claim victimhood when you’re shown the exit.

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

Shutting Down The Department Of Education: Linda McMahon Lays Out The ‘Final Mission’

McMahon is officially setting in motion the end of the agency, after it has already cut many of its left-wing prorams.

Exclusive: 57 Maine School Districts Hide Kids’ Gender Dysphoria From Parents

Democrat Maine Gov. Janet Mills is attempting to thwart federal civil rights law to allow the grooming of children in schools.

Indiana District Approves Pornographic Book In Class, Bans Requirement For Parental Consent

The school board denied a motion to require parental consent for children to access the book and approved another to keep the title on library shelves.

SCOTUS To Decide If Parents Can Reject LGBT Brainwashing For Their Children

To protect their religious beliefs and their children's innocence, these Montgomery County parents are taking their fight to SCOTUS.