A 9-0 rebuke for predatory prosecutors

There is a quiet storefront in New Jersey where women facing one of the most challenging moments in their lives can walk in, sit down, and be loved. No appointment. No judgment. No fee. Just material support—like baby clothes, diapers, and car seats—free parenting classes, ultrasounds and pregnancy tests, and abortion aftercare. And because no good deed goes unpunished, this charitable work caught the attention of the former New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin. He issued an invasive subpoena demanding that First Choice turn over constitutionally protected information—like donor names and addresses—all while insisting that the nonprofit could not even raise its constitutional claims in federal court.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued a sharp rebuke in its unanimous opinion in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Davenport. The decision is a landmark victory—not just for one pregnancy center in New Jersey but for every American who has ever donated to a cause, supported an organization, or simply wanted to live out their convictions without the government breathing down their necks.

Make no mistake: Former New Jersey Attorney General Platkin targeted First Choice. Not because anyone complained. Not because the state found evidence of wrongdoing. But because state officials didn’t like First Choice’s pro-life mission. He first issued a consumer alert warning the public about pregnancy centers (because they do not perform abortions). He even workshopped the alert with Planned Parenthood, accepted their edits, and thanked them for their “partnership.” Platkin then issued a sweeping subpoena demanding that First Choice hand over up to a decade of records and confidential information, including the names, phone numbers, home addresses, and workplaces of many of its donors.

Think about that. The state’s top law enforcement officer demanded that a faith-based nonprofit expose its supporters to the very officials who had declared themselves hostile to the group’s mission. Making matters worse, New Jersey insisted that First Choice could not raise its federal constitutional claims in federal court but must litigate them in state court—the New Jersey attorney general’s home turf.

But federal law says otherwise. That’s why a unanimous Supreme Court reaffirmed First Choice’s right to hold New Jersey accountable in federal court. As the Supreme Court recognized, precedent has long held that a demand for private donor information “inevitably deters the exercise of First Amendment rights.” Further, the Court recognized that New Jersey’s predatory subpoena created an inherent chilling effect on First Choice’s First Amendment right to associate with its donors—and that this chilling effect was enough to give First Choice standing to seek justice in federal court. That matters enormously. It means that government officials who demand the donor names of disfavored organizations can be held accountable in federal court for violating constitutional rights.

As the unanimous decision reveals, this is not a partisan issue. It is about whether the government can force any nonprofit to expose its donors’ names, addresses, and places of employment to hostile government officials. Tech companies, gun manufacturers, oil and gas firms, immigrant advocacy groups, and media organizations have all faced similar demands from government officials. The Supreme Court’s decision ensures that groups across the ideological spectrum will be able to raise their constitutional claims in federal court.

First Choice will now be able to pursue its claims—including its right to be free from government retaliation for exercising First Amendment freedoms—before a federal tribunal. And New Jersey’s new attorney general will have a chance to consider afresh whether targeting pregnancy centers is really a good use of the state’s resources.

First Choice Women’s Resource Centers didn’t ask for a legal battle—the ministry sought only to serve women and their families—but it made constitutional history. The Supreme Court’s decision ensures that state officials cannot keep targets of their unlawful investigations out of federal court. That is a victory worth celebrating, for the First Amendment, for government accountability, and for every woman who has ever needed someone to come alongside her and found that support at a pregnancy center.