Concerned that faith-based “crisis pregnancy centers” in New Jersey were misleading women, the state’s attorney general in 2023 issued a subpoena seeking information from them, including the identities of their donors.
The centers sought to challenge the subpoenas in federal court on First Amendment grounds, relying on a 2021 Supreme Court decision that said California could not require all charities soliciting contributions in the state to report the identities of their major donors while leaving open the possibility of targeted subpoenas.
On Monday, the court agreed to hear a challenge from the New Jersey centers that may help clarify the scope of that exception.
Crisis pregnancy centers have been flash points in the abortion rights debate. Often operated by faith-based groups opposed to abortion, they offer counseling and other services to pregnant women, generally with a goal of persuading them to decide against an abortion.
In his Supreme Court brief urging the justices to deny review, Matthew Platkin, the state’s attorney general, said his subpoena was meant to gather information on whether the centers had “misled donors and potential clients, among others, into believing that” they were “providing certain reproductive health care services.”
The subpoena sought copies of ads and donor solicitations, substantiation for claims in them, and the identities of medical personnel at the centers and of donors who contributed using one of two websites.
“Identifying those donors,” the brief said, “would allow the state to determine if they were ultimately misled.”
The precise question the justices agreed to hear is a narrow one. The case will test whether First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, which runs five centers that say they “offer free medical services and material support to women facing unplanned pregnancies,” may object to the New Jersey subpoena in federal court. A federal appeals court ruled that the centers must first contest the subpoena in state court.
But the case touches on broader issues involving abortion rights. The centers are represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian law firm and advocacy group that has litigated many cases for clients opposed to abortion, insurance coverage for contraception, and gay and transgender rights. The group has won a series of victories at the Supreme Court, including a 2018 ruling that California could not require crisis pregnancy centers there to supply women with information about how to end their pregnancies.
Erin Hawley, a lawyer for the group and the wife of Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, welcomed the court’s decision to take up the new case, First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Platkin, No. 24-781.
“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,” she said in a statement. “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.”
Mr. Platkin countered that his subpoena was a routine attempt to uncover important information.
“Nonprofits, including crisis pregnancy centers, may not deceive or defraud residents in our state,” he said in a statement, “and we may exercise our traditional investigative authority to ensure that they are not doing so.”
He added that the question the justices had agreed to decide was narrow.
“The question before the U.S. Supreme Court focuses on whether First Choice sued prematurely, not whether our subpoena was valid,” he said. “First Choice is looking for a special exception from the usual procedural rules as it tries to avoid complying with an entirely lawful state subpoena, something the U.S. Constitution does not permit it to do.”
Adam Liptak covers the Supreme Court and writes Sidebar, a column on legal developments. A graduate of Yale Law School, he practiced law for 14 years before joining The Times in 2002.
The post Supreme Court to Hear Case on Subpoena to Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers appeared first on New York Times.
