SCOTUS: 1A Protects Pro-Life Center Donors From Nosey Abortion States

A New Jersey-based pro-life pregnancy center may proceed with its federal challenge to lawfare waged against it by the state’s Democrat attorney general, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in a 25-page decision on Wednesday.

As The Federalist previously reported, First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Platkin came about when New Jersey’s Democrat-run government began investigating First Choice Women’s Resource Centers over seemingly baseless concerns that it was misleading its donors and misrepresenting its services. This investigation culminated in then-Attorney General Matthew Platkin’s office issuing First Choice a subpoena in an attempt to strong-arm the nonprofit into doxxing its donors and forfeiting information to a state with a strong abortion activism agenda.

As Justice Neil Gorsuch noted in his majority opinion, the New Jersey Division of Affairs nor the Attorney General’s office documented any complaints against First Choice despite the state’s attempts to solicit them from alleged “victim[s] of fraudulent, deceptive, misleading, or unlawful conduct.” Yet, Platkin pursued a 2023 subpoena against the pregnancy center that demanded it “disclose documents reflecting the names, phone numbers, addresses, and places of employment of all individuals” who donated to the nonprofit outside of First Choice’s webpage.

[READ:[READ:Justice Thomas Dismantles New Jersey’s Lawfare Against Pro-Life Center With A Single Question]

First Choice tried to challenge the subpoena in a federal district court, citing concerns about sharing “constitutionally protected” materials. The pregnancy center’s donors also acknowledged across two declarations that they were nervous about New Jersey’s “record of hostility toward pro-life groups” and “would have been less likely to donate to First Choice if we had known information about the donation might be disclosed,” signaling the state’s chilling attempts to injure their First Amendment rights.

First Choice’s plea, however, was ultimately dismissed for a state court to handle. In December 2024, the 3rd Circuit similarly held that a federal court should not weigh in until state proceedings concluded.

In his majority opinion, Gorsuch was careful to note that the high bench was not ruling on the merits of the case. Instead, he determined that “First Choice has established a present injury to its First Amendment associational rights,” contrary to the rulings of lower courts.

“Since the 1950s, this Court has confronted one official demand after another like the Attorney General’s. Over and again, we have held those demands burden the exercise of First Amendment rights. Disputing none of these precedents but seeking ways around them, the Attorney General has offered a variety of arguments. Some are old, some are new, but none succeeds,” Gorsuch concluded.

Alliance Defending Freedom counsel Erin Hawley, who argued the case, celebrated the decision as a “resounding victory.”

“In this resounding victory, the Supreme Court held to its long-standing precedent of recognizing that the Constitution protects First Choice and its donors from demands by a hostile state official to disclose donor identities and contact information,” Hawley said in a statement. “New Jersey’s attorney general targeted First Choice — a ministry that provides parenting classes, free ultrasounds, baby clothes, and more to its community — simply because of its pro-life views. That is blatantly unconstitutional. Should the Attorney General continue these efforts on remand, we look forward to presenting First Choice’s case in federal court.”

First Choice is one of many pregnancy centers facing lawfare and attacks from Democrat officials and activists.

In 2024, for example, Massachusetts’ leftist-led government rolled out a misleading ad campaign targeting pro-life centers and encouraging women to “avoid” them. Several billboards erected as part of the campaign accused the facilities of “’mislead[ing] you about your options if you’re pregnant’ because these organizations do not provide dangerous and deadly abortion services,” as Monroe Harless wrote in these pages.

Wednesday’s high court ruling also received favorable praise from Charlotte Lozier Institute Executive Director Karen Czarnecki. In a statement, she noted that the “decisive victory from the Supreme Court ensures these life-affirming pregnancy centers can continue to serve women, men, and families.”

“For years, pregnancy centers have been mischaracterized and unfairly attacked by abortion activists,” Czarnecki said. “CLI’s latest pregnancy center report shows demand for pregnancy centers have only grown, due to the love, education, and support they provide to those in need. I’m thrilled to see their essential mission continue without being undermined by bullies.”

Federalist Staff Writer Shawn Fleetwood contributed to this report.

Jordan Boyd is an award-winning staff writer at The Federalist and producer of “The Federalist Radio Hour.” Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on X @jordanboydtx.