Faith-Based Group Alleges NJ Attorney General Is Targeting Pro-Life Nonprofit
The U.S. Supreme Court will take up a significant case involving First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, a Christian, pro-life nonprofit in New Jersey that provides free support to pregnant women, new mothers, and fathers. The case, First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Platkin, centers on what the organization claims is an unconstitutional investigation by New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin, who issued a sweeping subpoena targeting the group’s operations and donor information.
First Choice, a faith-based organization offering services like parenting classes, free ultrasounds, and baby supplies, alleges that Platkin’s actions are a direct attack on its religious and pro-life stance. The subpoena demands extensive records, including the identities of donors behind nearly 5,000 contributions and up to a decade’s worth of internal, confidential documents. The nonprofit argues that these demands violate its First Amendment protections, particularly the right to keep donor identities private and to be free from government retaliation for its beliefs.
Read More
“New Jersey’s attorney general is targeting First Choice—a ministry that provides parenting classes, free ultrasounds, baby clothes, and more to its community—simply because of its pro-life views,” said Erin Hawley, senior counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the legal organization representing First Choice. “The Constitution protects First Choice and its donors from unjustified demands to disclose their identities, and First Choice is entitled to vindicate those rights in federal court.”
The case also raises questions about where such constitutional challenges should be heard. After First Choice sought to contest the subpoena in federal court, Platkin filed a separate lawsuit in state court, prompting lower federal courts to rule that the nonprofit must first pursue its claims in state court. ADF attorneys argue this ruling unfairly limits First Choice’s access to federal courts, a right afforded to other civil rights plaintiffs facing constitutional violations by state officials. They’ve asked the Supreme Court to clarify that First Choice can challenge the investigation in federal court without first navigating state court proceedings.
“The First Amendment protects First Choice’s right to freely speak about its beliefs, exercise its faith, associate with like-minded individuals and organizations, and continue to provide its free services in a caring and compassionate environment to people facing unplanned pregnancies,” Hawley stated. “The lower courts have wrongly held that First Choice is relegated to state court to present its constitutional claims. We are looking forward to presenting our case to the Supreme Court and urging it to hold that First Choice has the same right to federal court as any other civil rights plaintiff.”
The Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case, announced today, Monday, June 16, marks a critical moment for First Choice and similar organizations. At stake is not only the nonprofit’s ability to operate without what it describes as burdensome and unjustified government overreach but also the broader question of how faith-based and pro-life groups can defend their constitutional protections. As the case moves forward, it could set a precedent for how far state officials can go in targeting organizations based on their beliefs.
