Over the last few years, some state attorneys general, including New York’s Letitia James and New Jersey’s Matt Platkin, have launched unconstitutional crusades to harass pregnancy centers.
Yesterday, a federal appeals court issued a unanimous preliminary ruling against James and Platkin’s demand that one group turn over the names of its donors caught the attention of the U.S. Supreme Court, which this morning will hear about his unlawful investigation into First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, a collection of five faith-based pregnancy centers.
Platkin has made no secret of his hostility towards pregnancy centers. Disapproving of groups that provide free support and information about abortion alternatives to women facing unplanned pregnancies, Platkin issued a consumer alert — drafted with the help of Planned Parenthood — warning New Jerseyans not to go to pregnancy centers because they “do NOT provide abortion[s].” He also signed an open letter pledging to take action against those centers.
And he made good on that promise. Without any evidence of wrongdoing, and citing no complaint, Platkin launched a baseless investigation into First Choice. He issued a sweeping subpoena demanding First Choice turn over years of sensitive and confidential information — most important, the names, phone numbers, addresses, and places of employment of more than half its donors.
That outrageous demand is based on a laughable theory: that First Choice — a pro-life pregnancy center — has hoodwinked donors into contributing to an organization that they might believe performs abortions. He says he needs their names to confirm they weren’t deceived. This is nothing but a fishing expedition from a hostile state official — harassing donors because of their beliefs.
This isn’t the first time a state official has abused his investigatory power over an ideological difference. In the 1950s, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People was making strides to end racial discrimination, and that made some uncomfortable. As part of an effort to oust the organization from Southern states, state and local officials sought to compel the disclosure of the group’s membership lists.
The scheme worked. Fearing harassment and reprisals, members quickly disassociated with the NAACP, and the group’s membership plummeted 50% in Southern states between 1955 and 1957.
In NAACP vs. Alabama, the Supreme Court held the government disclosure demands unlawful and upheld the group’s freedom of association. And for decades since, the court has affirmed the constitutional right to maintain the confidentiality of a group’s donors from government disclosure demands.
Yet the lower court’s decision in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers vs. Platkin refused to even give First Choice a hearing on its First Amendment claims. That harms victims of abusive government probes by forcing them to litigate their claims in state court, denying them access to federal court. That’s why my firm, Alliance Defending Freedom, is asking the nation’s high court to recognize First Choice’s right to challenge Platkin’s demands in federal court.
Animosity from a state official — whose chief duty is to protect his citizens and uphold the rule of law — not only infringes on First Choice’s protected civil liberties, but it can also put the centers in danger. It wasn’t long ago that pro-abortion groups firebombed, vandalized, and threatened dozens of pregnancy centers following the ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade.
Indeed, First Choice attested that the nationwide “pattern of violence and intimidation” against pregnancy centers magnified the chilling effect on the faith-based nonprofit, explaining its concern that “if its donors’ identities became public, they may be subjected to similar threats.”
At a time when we are increasingly seeing radical individuals use violence as a method to silence speech and ideas they don’t like, we must ensure organizations of all ideological stripes can associate anonymously and safely.
Federal courts exist to uphold the First Amendment protections for everyone to peacefully express their beliefs. When a state’s top law enforcement official targets and harasses a group just because he disagrees with their message, he should be held accountable for violating their constitutional rights. And like any other civil rights plaintiff, First Choice is entitled to vindicate those fundamental freedoms in federal court.
Pregnancy centers are a force for good in their communities. They serve women and families by offering a plethora of free services, including ultrasounds, STD testing and treatment, parenting support, counseling, and baby supplies like clothing, diapers, and car seats. All Americans have the right to support such good causes without the government breathing down their necks.
Waggoner is CEO, president, and chief counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom.
