SCOTUS rules 9-0 that pregnancy center can sue NJ in federal court

The Supreme Court has issued a 9-0 ruling allowing a New Jersey pregnancy resource center (PRC) to bring its First Amendment claim to federal court, after the PRC faced harassment and discrimination from the state's attorney general.

Key Takeaways:

• In December of 2023, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed a lawsuit against New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin.

• Platkin, after working with Planned Parenthood to draft a consumer alert warning New Jerseyans against PRCs, demanded 10 years worth of documents and records from First Choice Resource Centers, despite there having been no complaints against the PRC.

• Additionally, Platkin opened an investigation into First Choice for alleged violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.

• After multiple court battles, ADF appealed to the Supreme Court, claiming Platkin was violating the First Amendment.

• In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court agreed that First Choice has standing to bring its First Amendment claim to federal court.

The Backstory:

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed a lawsuit against New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin on behalf of First Choice Women’s Resource Centers in 2023, after Platkin made what the legal group called an “unreasonable and improper subpoena.”

According to ADF, Platkin “launched an exploratory probe” into First Choice “under the pretense of conducting a civil investigation into possible violations” of New Jersey laws.

Furthermore, ADF alleged that Platkin worked with Planned Parenthood to draft a consumer alert warning residents against utilizing the services of PRCs, and then opened a civil investigation into First Choice for alleged violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.

Platkin then demanded 10 years’ worth of documentation and records despite having no evidence of wrongdoing or crime, nor any complaints against the PRC. As ADF noted at the time:

AG Platkin has never cited any complaint or other substantive evidence of wrongdoing to justify his demands but has launched an exploratory probe into the lawful activities, constitutionally protected speech, religious observance, constitutionally protected associations, and nonpublic internal communications and records of a non-profit organization that holds a view with which he disagrees as a matter of public policy.

First Choice eventually gave Platkin 2,300 pages of documents, and ADF filed a lawsuit in federal court to halt the AG's requests for even more documents. Platkin responded with a countersuit in a state court to force the PRC to hand over more information, including the identities of its donors.

The federal court said that, due to Platkin’s filing in state court, First Choice must pursue its federal claims in a state court before moving on to a federal court.

ADF asked the Supreme Court to confirm that civil rights plaintiffs do not need to litigate first in state court for constitutional violations, as First Choice claimed Platkin discriminated against the organization for its pro-life views, and violated the organization’s right to free speech.

“The U.S. Constitution protects First Choice and its donors from unjustified demands for their identities and from government threats that attempt to shut down their speech because of its viewpoint,” ADF Senior Counsel Erin Hawley, vice president of the ADF Center for Life and Regulatory Practice, said, adding:

"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 difficult pregnancy circumstances. The lower courts have wrongly held that First Choice is relegated to state court to present its constitutional claims. That is inconsistent with civil rights law and with the First Amendment."

The Details:

In a unanimous 9-0 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that First Choice can bring its lawsuit to federal court, though the suit is now against New Jersey's new attorney general, Jennifer Davenport. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the Court's unanimous opinion, in which he offered a sharp rebuke against Platkin and Davenport, writing:

"Since the 1950s, this Court has confronted one official demand after another like the Attorney General’s. Over and again, we have held those demands burden the exercise of First Amendment rights. Disputing none of these precedents but seeking ways around them, the Attorney General has offered a variety of arguments. Some are old, some are new, but none succeeds.

Accordingly, the judgment of the Third Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."

As to Platkin's demand that First Choice reveal the names of its donors, Gorsuch wrote, "An official demand for private donor information is enough to discourage reasonable individuals from associating with a group. It is enough to discourage groups from expressing dissident views."

Alliance Defending Freedom

@ADFLegal

·Follow

VICTORY: A 9-0 ruling in First Choice v. Platkin marks 18 Supreme Court victories for ADF!

2:21 PM · Apr 29, 2026

112

Reply

Copy link

Read 5 replies

ADF's Erin Hawley celebrated the ruling in a press release:

"In this resounding victory, the Supreme Court held to its long-standing precedent of recognizing that the Constitution protects First Choice and its donors from demands by a hostile state official to disclose donor identities and contact information. New Jersey’s attorney general targeted First Choice — a ministry that provides parenting classes, free ultrasounds, baby clothes, and more to its community — simply because of its pro-life views. That is blatantly unconstitutional. Should the Attorney General continue these efforts on remand, we look forward to presenting First Choice’s case in federal court."

First Choice Executive Director Aimee Huber likewise applauded the decision, stating that the work of the PRC "has made a tangible, life-saving difference for tens of thousands of New Jersey women and their children" and that its centers shouldn't be harassed by the government "just because it disagrees with their message and their mission.”

The Bottom Line:

Though this does not put an end to the legal battle for First Choice, it is a significant victory.