We Must Resist the Left’s Unconstitutional War on Pregnancy Resource Centers

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard arguments in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Platkin – an important case for free speech and the pro-life movement.

First Choice is challenging a 2023 subpoena by New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin, which sought to compel the pro-life center to release information about its donors in a blatant attempt to intimidate the organization and chill its constitutional rights of association. The ACLJ filed several amicus briefs in this case to defend pro-life centers and their First Amendment rights.

Platkin took this action as part of a broader investigation targeting Pregnancy Resource Centers (PRCs) that allegedly deceive clients and donors about whether or not they provide abortion referrals. Yet as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas revealed through his incisive questions, the entire case is a fishing expedition: The plaintiff has never been the subject of any complaints of deception and was clearly targeted because of its status as a pro-life alternative to abortion providers like Planned Parenthood.

Since the Supreme Court struck down the constitutionally factitious Roe v. Wade decision, progressives have intensified their persecution of PRCs like First Choice. These pro-abortion zealots take issue with the fact that these charitable organizations – often affiliated with churches – provide ultrasounds and other services that encourage women to bring their pregnancies to term.

Ironically, the people who never stop shouting about “choice” apparently do not want women to have the opportunity to do just that if it means choosing life.

The First Amendment considerations at stake are plain to see and have implications for private organizations of any stripe. As the attorney for First Choice argued, these types of actions threaten the survival of nonprofits by potentially dissuading donors from making contributions out of fear of public exposure or scrutiny, and by threatening the organization’s continued operations if it refuses to comply with the subpoena. Even the Left-wing ACLU joined an amicus brief in support of First Choice’s right to seek federal relief.

This case spotlights the pro-abortion political project at work – and what it reveals isn’t pretty.

New Jersey has some of the most permissive abortion laws in the country, lacking any restrictions based on gestational duration, providing public funding for abortion, and allowing minors to terminate their pregnancies without parental consent. Yet for the extremists who set these policies, it’s not enough to merely permit such monstrous practices as partial-birth abortion – they must also crush any organizations that seek to save women and the babies they carry from this soul-crushing act of destruction.

The ACLJ has been at the tip of the spear in exposing the abortion lobby’s campaign against PRCs at the state level – drawing attention to the massive public relations campaign by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts defaming and misrepresenting PRCs. These PR exercises often focus on the fact that pregnancy centers offer free ultrasounds as a means of dissuading women from seeking abortions. Their outrage over this practice is also an admission: They know how powerful it is to hear the beating heart and see the small, unmistakable form of a developing baby on that ultrasound screen, and they want to use taxpayer funds to ensure that women choose to destroy those innocent lives.

As part of their misinformation efforts, pro-abortion activists and public officials also obscure the many resources made available to women who seek help from these pregnancy centers. This includes assistance in accessing prenatal care; help navigating the adoption process for mothers unable to raise their child themselves; counseling services; baby supplies; and parenting resources for mothers and fathers navigating unplanned or difficult pregnancies.

The public servants in New Jersey and elsewhere who use their power to persecute organizations that offer a way out of abortion are on the wrong side of the Constitution and of morality. As someone who had the privilege to serve in Congress and at the highest levels of government, I’m proud to have used that position to advance policies that protected life and reasserted the primacy of the right to life enshrined in our Constitution. I pray that the Supreme Court will decide the case of First Choice v. Platkin correctly – for the sake of our First Amendment protections, and to protect the good work being done by these organizations on behalf of the mothers and children they serve.