The U.S. Supreme Court announced Monday it will take up the case of First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Platkin, a significant dispute pitting a faith-based pregnancy center against New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin over an expansive subpoena. The case raises critical First Amendment questions regarding donor privacy and the right to challenge state investigations in federal court.
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorneys, representing First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, a pro-life ministry, are asking the Supreme Court to affirm the right of civil rights plaintiffs to seek relief in federal court without first being compelled to litigate their claims in state court.
READ: New Jersey Man Gets 6 Years In Federal Prison For Elder Fraud Scheme In Florida
The controversy stems from a subpoena issued by Attorney General Platkin, demanding that First Choice disclose the identities of nearly 5,000 donors and provide up to 10 years of confidential internal documents. First Choice argues that this demand is an unconstitutional overreach, violating the First Amendment’s protections for free speech and association, particularly regarding donor anonymity.
“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,” stated Erin Hawley, ADF Senior Counsel and vice president of the ADF Center for Life and Regulatory Practice. “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.”
First Choice initially sought to challenge the subpoena in federal court. However, Attorney General Platkin subsequently filed his own lawsuit in state court, leading lower federal courts to rule that First Choice must pursue its federal claims within the state court system first. ADF filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court, arguing that this effectively denies civil rights plaintiffs their right to a federal forum for constitutional challenges.
READ: From Mexico To Georgia: Drug Lord’s Lavish Lifestyle Ends In Guilty Plea
Hawley emphasized the broader implications of the case: “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. 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 this case signals its willingness to address the complex interplay between state investigatory powers and federal constitutional rights, particularly in the context of organizations with religious or ideologically driven missions.
The outcome could have significant implications for how similar disputes are handled across the nation. Arguments for the case are expected to be heard in the Supreme Court’s upcoming term.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Connect with us: Follow the Tampa Free Press on Facebook and Twitter for breaking news and updates.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.
