Court agrees to hear appeal from faith-based pregnancy center
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Monday it will hear from a faith-based pregnancy center in New Jersey challenging a state investigation into whether it misled people into thinking its services included referrals for abortion.
The justices agreed to consider an appeal from First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, which wants to block a 2023 subpoena from Democratic New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin seeking information about the crisis pregnancy center’s donors, advertisements and medical personnel. It has not yet been enforced.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case nearly three years after overturning abortion as a nationwide right. Since then, most Republican-controlled states have started enforcing new bans or restrictions, and most Democrat-dominated ones have sought to protect abortion access.
Attorneys for First Choice Women’s Resource Centers had described the organization as a “faith-based, pro-life pregnancy center.” Crisis pregnancy centers generally try to steer women facing an unwanted pregnancy away from choosing an abortion.
The group challenged the subpoena in federal court, but a judge found that the case wasn’t yet far enough along to weigh in. An appeals court agreed.
First Choice Women’s Resource Centers appealed to the Supreme Court, saying the push for donor information had chilled its First Amendment rights.
Meanwhile, Platkin has sought to enforce the subpoena in state court, but the judge there has so far refused the state’s push to require the group to turn over documents and told the two sides to negotiate instead.
Platkin, who had urged the justices to pass on the case, said the organization has long refused to answer questions about its operations and potential misrepresentations about reproductive health care.
“First Choice is looking for a special exception from the usual procedural rules as it tries to avoid complying with an entirely lawful state subpoena,” he said Monday. “No industry is entitled to that type of special treatment — period.”
First Choice argued that attorneys general on both sides of the political aisle have been accused of misusing investigative authority and defendants must be able to challenge their demands in federal court.
The pregnancy center is represented by the group Alliance Defending Freedom.
“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,” attorney Erin Hawley said. “We are looking forward to presenting our case to the Supreme Court.”
The court will hear arguments in the case in the fall.
The justices agreed to consider an appeal from First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, which wants to block a 2023 subpoena from Democratic New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin seeking information about the crisis pregnancy center’s donors, advertisements and medical personnel. It has not yet been enforced.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case nearly three years after overturning abortion as a nationwide right. Since then, most Republican-controlled states have started enforcing new bans or restrictions, and most Democrat-dominated ones have sought to protect abortion access.
Attorneys for First Choice Women’s Resource Centers had described the organization as a “faith-based, pro-life pregnancy center.” Crisis pregnancy centers generally try to steer women facing an unwanted pregnancy away from choosing an abortion.
The group challenged the subpoena in federal court, but a judge found that the case wasn’t yet far enough along to weigh in. An appeals court agreed.
First Choice Women’s Resource Centers appealed to the Supreme Court, saying the push for donor information had chilled its First Amendment rights.
Meanwhile, Platkin has sought to enforce the subpoena in state court, but the judge there has so far refused the state’s push to require the group to turn over documents and told the two sides to negotiate instead.
Platkin, who had urged the justices to pass on the case, said the organization has long refused to answer questions about its operations and potential misrepresentations about reproductive health care.
“First Choice is looking for a special exception from the usual procedural rules as it tries to avoid complying with an entirely lawful state subpoena,” he said Monday. “No industry is entitled to that type of special treatment — period.”
First Choice argued that attorneys general on both sides of the political aisle have been accused of misusing investigative authority and defendants must be able to challenge their demands in federal court.
The pregnancy center is represented by the group Alliance Defending Freedom.
“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,” attorney Erin Hawley said. “We are looking forward to presenting our case to the Supreme Court.”
The court will hear arguments in the case in the fall.
Court order gives religious organizations new chance to challenge New York abortion rule
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday ordered a New York court to take a new look at whether some religious organizations should be excluded from a state regulation requiring health insurance plans to cover abortions.
The justices acted after the court unanimously ruled earlier in June that Wisconsin discriminated against a Catholic charity by forcing it to pay state unemployment taxes.
The New York case poses a similar issue because the state exempts religious employers if their purpose is to spread religious values and they primarily employ and serve people of their faith. But religious groups that serve and employ people regardless of their beliefs don’t qualify for the exemption.
The Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany and other church groups challenged the rule.
It’s the second time the nation’s highest court has sent the case back to New York courts. Last year, the New York Court of Appeals upheld the regulation after taking into account the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in 2021 in favor of a Catholic foster care agency in Philadelphia that refused to work with same-sex couples because of its religious opposition to same-sex marriage.
The justices acted after the court unanimously ruled earlier in June that Wisconsin discriminated against a Catholic charity by forcing it to pay state unemployment taxes.
The New York case poses a similar issue because the state exempts religious employers if their purpose is to spread religious values and they primarily employ and serve people of their faith. But religious groups that serve and employ people regardless of their beliefs don’t qualify for the exemption.
The Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany and other church groups challenged the rule.
It’s the second time the nation’s highest court has sent the case back to New York courts. Last year, the New York Court of Appeals upheld the regulation after taking into account the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in 2021 in favor of a Catholic foster care agency in Philadelphia that refused to work with same-sex couples because of its religious opposition to same-sex marriage.
