The battle for free speech and religious liberty is heating up in New Jersey. First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, a pro-life Christian ministry, faces an investigation threatening its core mission. This case, First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Platkin, isn’t just about one organization—it’s about protecting the rights of every group to speak freely. It ensures they can operate without fear of government overreach. As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments this fall, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Let’s explore why this case resonates far beyond New Jersey.
A Ministry Under Fire
First Choice serves over 36,000 women across New Jersey, offering counseling, medical services, diapers, and support for those facing unplanned pregnancies. Yet, New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin launched an investigation. He issued a subpoena demanding sensitive documents, including donor lists, without specifying any legal violations. This move followed a letter from 16 Democratic attorneys general accusing pro-life centers of spreading “misinformation.”
Why does this matter?
The subpoena’s vague nature and lack of clear justification raise red flags. It suggests a targeted effort to silence a group based on its religious and pro-life beliefs. First Choice, represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, argues that Platkin’s actions violate its First Amendment rights. These rights are to free speech and association. The U.S. government, 19 states led by Missouri, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce agree. They filed briefs that call out this investigation as a growing trend of politically motivated probes.
The Bigger Picture
This case isn’t just about First Choice—it’s a warning sign for all nonprofits, religious groups, and advocacy organizations. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce notes an “exploding” rise in state-led investigations. These demand confidential records, chilling free speech and association. When governments can probe organizations without evidence of wrongdoing, it creates a dangerous precedent. Moreover, the Becket Fund argues that the First Amendment protects religious groups from state scrutiny over their mission-driven decisions. Forcing First Choice to hand over donors lists risks exposing supporters to harassment, a tactic that stifles free expression. Heartbeat International, a network of pregnancy help organizations, warns that such actions could impact similar groups nationwide.
Why the Supreme Court Must Act
The lower courts dismissed First Choice’s federal lawsuit. They claimed the subpoena is “non-self-enforcing” and must be challenged in state court first. However, supporters argue this misinterprets state law. It ignores the immediate harm caused by the investigation’s chilling effect. Americans United for Life points out that the Third Circuit’s ruling sidesteps constitutional protections. This leaves First Choice vulnerable. As the Supreme Court takes up this case, it has a chance to reaffirm the First Amendment’s role. It can shield groups from overzealous state actions. Protecting First Choice means protecting the right of every organization to operate without fear of ideological targeting.
A Call to Stand Together
First Choice’s fight is our fight. Whether you’re pro-life, pro-choice, or simply value free speech, this case underscores the need to guard against government overreach. By standing with First Choice, we defend the principles that allow diverse voices to thrive. Let us rally behind the idea that no group should face harassment for its beliefs. The Supreme Court’s decision could shape the future of free speech—let’s hope it chooses wisely.
