(LifeSiteNews) — Pregnancy resource centers were before the Supreme Court today, asking it for help to stop a sweeping probe by the left-wing attorney general of New Jersey. The pregnancy centers have drawn widespread support, not just from aligned conservative and pro-life groups, but also from the pro-abortion American Civil Liberties Union.
During oral arguments, justices from across the spectrum appeared skeptical of New Jersey’s position.
First Choice Women’s Resource Center v. Platkin concerns a question over whether the state or the federal court system has jurisdiction over a First Amendment claim – but it comes due to a harassment campaign launched by pro-abortion Attorney General Matthew Platkin, a Democrat.
Platkin issued a “sweeping Subpoena demand[ing] that First Choice disclose the identities behind nearly half of its donations by number and almost 70% of its donations by amount,” according to a filing from First Choice’s attorneys. The state acknowledged during the hearing that no one actually complained about First Choice before they began their investigation.
Yet curiously, the state argued at the Supreme Court today that it never actually would have punished the pregnancy center for not turning over documents (which it demanded). This claim drew skepticism from both Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Amy Coney Barrett.
The demand came against the backdrop of the Democratic Party’s goal to ensure as many preborn babies as possible are killed in the womb. Not content to subsidize abortions through all nine months of pregnancy and to legalize the killing of preborn babies for any reason, Democratic Party leaders have turned their ire on nonprofits that help mothers choose life.
Attorney General Platkin, along with nominally Catholic Governor Phil Murphy, warned women of the state not to visit pregnancy help centers, which offer free diapers, counseling, and parenting support. Platkin previously boasted about the issuance of a “consumer alert warning” targeting the nonprofits.
New Jersey is having some trouble explaining why a subpoena for thousands of donor records is legal. pic.twitter.com/wfMNKoZHVp
— Matt Lamb (@MattLamb22) December 2, 2025
However, the case has drawn together unusual allies who are concerned about government intrusion into the private records of nonprofits.
Alliance Defending Freedom is representing the group at the Supreme Court.
Litigator Erin Hawley laid out the group’s argument in a USA Today opinion piece.
“We believe that these demands are politically motivated retaliation for First Choice’s pro-life viewpoint,” Hawley wrote. She also argued today in front of the Supreme Court. “And they rob New Jersey women of the practical help and support that First Choice provides.”
The order also has a “chilling effect for donors,” Hawley, the wife of Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley, wrote.
“Because revealing one’s membership or support for an advocacy group tells the world about a person’s most deeply held beliefs, the Supreme Court has held that donors have a constitutional right to anonymously support causes,” Hawley wrote, citing a 2021 Supreme Court case.
“It stands to reason that donors to First Choice would be unlikely to donate knowing their information could be exposed to a state official who has a history of hostility toward pro-life viewpoints,” Hawley said.
The pro-abortion ACLU took a similar line of argument.
“Even before they’re enforced, law enforcement subpoenas seeking sensitive donor information threaten to scare away supporters essential to any nonprofit’s work,” Brian Hauss stated in a news release for the left-wing group. “At a time when government officials throughout the country abuse regulatory powers to punish their ideological opponents, federal courts must remain a venue in which people can vindicate their First Amendment rights.”
The ACLU of New Jersey acknowledged its different views on the killing of innocent babies in the womb but said it supports the centers’ rights.
“While the ACLU of New Jersey advocates for different policy outcomes than the plaintiff in this case, we are on the same page that investigatory subpoenas seeking sensitive information put all advocacy at risk,” Jeanne LoCicero, legal director of the ACLU of New Jersey,” said in the news release. “Federal court should remain open to anyone who believes their First Amendment rights are being violated, regardless of viewpoint.”
Democratic Party targets pregnancy centers who help women
The legal assault on the pregnancy centers ran parallel to hundreds of violent attacks waged by left-wing activists in the wake of the reversal of Roe v. Wade. While leftists set pregnancy centers on fire, their allies in the Democratic Party targeted the centers for prosecution.
At the same time, some of the wild claims about pregnancy centers have fallen apart upon a brief examination. Massachusetts, for example, claimed that pregnancy resource centers were violating the civil rights of residents.
However, a tipline set up to catch the pro-life scofflaws yielded zero complaints, according to an original investigation by LifeSiteNews and obtained public records.
Pregnancy centers, meanwhile, provided nearly half a billion dollars in resources to mother, preborn babies, and their fathers in 2024, according to a recent report.