The First Amendment rights of pro-life groups and their financial supporters are under attack.
The First Amendment rights of pro-life groups and their financial supporters are under attack.
S ince the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, Americans facing unexpected pregnancies have sought out pro-life pregnancy centers for guidance and support. Last year, these centers surpassed 1 million clients for the first time, according to the pro-life organization SBA Pro-Life America. But the radical left sees helping women to love and care for their unborn baby as an evil that must be stopped, so they are going all out to shut down these centers. The left’s latest attack is to go after the donors to these nonprofit centers. The law has long protected nonprofit donors from having their names disclosed to protect them and the nonprofit organization from intimidation or manipulation.
Radical left groups have used their usual playbook against these Christ-centered, donor-supported volunteer centers: threats, intimidation, vandalism, and even violence. Perhaps their favorite tactic is to have pro-abortion officials use the power of the state in places that they control to weaponize regulations, lawfare, and coercion to try to put these groups out of business — and paint targets on the backs of their donors. Thankfully, the courts have respected the laws in place across the country to protect nonprofit donor privacy. So when a leftist official tries to violate the law, nonprofits can access the courts to protect their First Amendment rights. That was, until a recent ruling in a case out of New Jersey.
On December 2, the Supreme Court will hear the case of First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, a Christian medical nonprofit in New Jersey that is seeking protection from a subpoena issued by New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin, a pro-abortion Democrat. Platkin’s subpoena demands extensive documents from the group stretching back over ten years, including sensitive donor and even client records. This looks like the typical case of a government official targeting a Christian nonprofit because of its religious and pro-life activities, as well as donors who are following their religious convictions to support unborn babies and mothers in crisis. Not only is that an attack on Christians, but it also strikes at the very core of our First Amendment rights.
Facing a potential violation of their civil rights, First Choice representatives did what any nonprofit would do. They went to federal court and asked for relief. Incredibly, however, the lower court ruled that it could not even consider the matter until the state’s subpoena is enforced under penalty of sanctions. In other words, the court wouldn’t hear the case until all of the records and donor names had been released to Platkin. However, privacy, once lost, cannot be restored.
First Choice is on strong legal footing to oppose Platkin’s demands. As far back as the civil rights movement, the Supreme Court has protected the ability of Americans to privately support nonprofits. That’s because donor privacy rights are critical to ensuring that causes are not censored or suppressed through government or private intimidation of their members.
As recently as 2021, the Court reaffirmed that nonprofits have a First Amendment right to keep their donor lists private from state officials. That case was spurred by donor list demands from another Democratic state attorney general with deep ties to Planned Parenthood: former California attorney general Kamala Harris.
If the N.J. District Court’s ruling allows disclosure to occur before a matter can be litigated, there’s no telling who could be targeted next or how many other states will adopt this underhanded tactic. The justices need to state clearly that when First Amendment rights are threatened, Americans can go to the courts before it’s too late.
Planned Parenthood and its allies cannot be allowed to make enemies lists of pro-life Americans to target with bogus investigations, harassment, and threats. Courts have all the tools they need to put a stop to the intimidation. They just have to open their doors and give First Choice its day in court.