{"id":11103,"date":"2025-12-03T17:27:30","date_gmt":"2025-12-03T17:27:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/?p=11103"},"modified":"2025-12-03T17:27:30","modified_gmt":"2025-12-03T17:27:30","slug":"nj-tells-scotus-targeted-pregnancy-center-received-no-complaints","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/?p=11103","title":{"rendered":"NJ Tells SCOTUS Targeted Pregnancy Center Received No Complaints"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n Reading Time:<\/span> 4<\/span> minutes<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

An attorney representing New Jersey before the U.S. Supreme Court has admitted that a pro-life pregnancy care center the state subpoenaed had no complaints leveled against it.\n<\/p>\n

This content is supported by your donations.
Give today.<\/h4>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court heard arguments on Tuesday morning in the case of\u00a0First Choice Women\u2019s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Matthew J. Platkin, Attorney General of New Jersey<\/em>.\n<\/p>\n

At issue was whether New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin could require First Choice, a pro-life center network, to disclose its donor lists and donors\u2019 information under threat of legal penalties.\n<\/p>\n

Sundeep Iyer, chief counsel to the New Jersey attorney general, argued the case on behalf of the state. He argued that the subpoena did not violate First Choice\u2019s First Amendment rights.\n<\/p>\n

During the proceedings, Justice Clarence Thomas asked Iyer if he had \u201ccomplaints that formed the basis of your concern about the fundraising activities\u201d of First Choice.\n<\/p>\n

When Iyer replied that \u201cwe certainly had complaints about crisis pregnancy centers,\u201d Thomas interjected to ask if he had had complaints about First Choice specifically.\n<\/p>\n

\u201cSo, I think we\u2019ve been clear from the outset that we haven\u2019t had complaints about this specific crisis pregnancy center,\u201d Iyer responded.\n<\/p>\n

Thomas immediately followed-up by asking, \u201cSo you had no basis to think that they were deceiving any of their contributors?\u201d\n<\/p>\n

\u201cI don\u2019t think that\u2019s correct, your honor,\u201d Iyer said. \u201cI think we had carefully canvassed all of the public information that is provided on the website of First Choice in making a determination that we wanted to initiate an investigation.\u201d\n<\/p>\n

When Thomas reiterated that the state \u201chad no complainants,\u201d Iyer acknowledged this, but added that state and federal governments \u201cinitiate investigations all the time in the absence of complaints where they have a reason to suspect that there could be potential issues of legal compliance.\u201d\n<\/p>\n

\u201cIt could be the case, based on our investigation, when we look at documents, when we look at information, that ultimately we\u2019ll determine that First Choice isn\u2019t liable for any violations of law,\u201d said Iyer.\n<\/p>\n

\u201cThat just seems to be a burdensome way to find out whether someone has a confusing website,\u201d Thomas responded. \u201cIt would seem that the obvious way to refute [First Choice\u2019s arguments] was to say \u2018we have 100 complaints.\u2019\u201d\n<\/p>\n

\u201cBut you say you have no complaints, but rather you looked at the website and their materials and you think it could have been misleading.\u201d\n<\/p>\n

Iyer replied that the subpoena issued to First Choice was based on four concerns, namely questions about \u201cpotentially misleading donors,\u201d \u201cunlicensed practice of medicine,\u201d \u201cpatient privacy practices\u201d and \u201cpotentially misleading or untrue\u201d statements.\n<\/p>\n

\u201cWe had no complaints,\u201d he restated.\n<\/p>\n

Iyer argued that the subpoena was \u201cnon-self-executing,\u201d meaning that the state attorney general doesn\u2019t have the authority to enforce it, but rather it must be approved by a court.\n<\/p>\n

As a result, according to Iyer, the subpoena requesting substantial donor information did not have an unlawful \u201cchilling effect\u201d on the First Amendment rights of First Choice.\n<\/p>\n

Justice Elena Kagan asked Iyer, \u201cWhat\u2019s an ordinary person supposed to think and what\u2019s an ordinary person supposed to do based on what an ordinary person is supposed to think?\u201d\n<\/p>\n

Kagan said that \u201can ordinary person\u201d who would be \u201cpresented with this subpoena and then told \u2018but don\u2019t worry, it has to be stamped by a court\u2019 is not going to take that as very reassuring.\u201d\n<\/p>\n

Chief Justice John Roberts asked Iyer about the potential impact of future donations to First Choice, asking him, \u201cYou don\u2019t think it might have an effect on future potential donors to the organization to know that their name, phone number, address, etc. could be disclosed as a result of this subpoena?\u201d\n<\/p>\n

When Iyer insisted that there was no evidence of any donors being chilled by the subpoena, Roberts pressed him about how exactly he knows that no donors have been deterred by it.\n<\/p>\n

Iyer noted that a group of unnamed donors said they \u201cwould have been less likely,\u201d which he labeled a \u201cbackwards-looking statement\u201d and not about \u201cprospective\u201d harm.\n<\/p>\n

\u201cReally?\u201d interjected Justice Neil Gorsuch. \u201cWe\u2019re going to now pick over the tense of the verb that they chose?\u201d\n<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat if they had used the future tense?\u201d asked Justice Samuel Alito. \u201c\u2018If this information is disclosed, we will not donate.\u2019 \u2026 That wouldn\u2019t be enough?\u201d\n<\/p>\n

Ultimately, Iyer argued that since he believed the subpoena was not self-executing, that negated all the debates over tenses in the donor declaration of concern.\n<\/p>\n

In November 2023, New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin\u00a0subpoenaed First Choice for records\u00a0that included donor lists and private correspondence to investigate whether the network was violating the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.\n<\/p>\n

Platkin was one of 16 Democrat attorneys general who signed a\u00a0letter\u00a0in 2023 accusing pro-life pregnancy centers of spreading \u201cmisinformation and harm\u201d by \u201cmisleading consumers and delaying access to critical, time-sensitive reproductive healthcare.\u201d\n<\/p>\n

Before the subpoena deadline came, First Choice\u00a0filed a complaint\u00a0against Platkin in December 2023, claiming that the subpoena was too broad in its scope and was unconstitutional.\n<\/p>\n

U.S. District Judge Michael A. Shipp, an Obama appointee,\u00a0ruled against\u00a0First Choice in January 2024, writing that the suit was \u201cnot ripe\u201d and that the court \u201clacks subject-matter jurisdiction.\u201d\n<\/p>\n

\u201cPlaintiffs claims related to the Subpoena\u2019s enforceability in this matter would ripen only after the contingent future event that forms the basis of its alleged injury occurs,\u201d ruled Shipp.\n<\/p>\n

\u201cBecause this Court cannot yet know whether the state court tasked by the New Jersey state legislature with overseeing subpoena enforcement proceedings like this will, in fact, enforce the Subpoena in its current form, this matter is not ripe for resolution because no actual or imminent injury has occurred.\u201d\n<\/p>\n

In February of last year, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals\u00a0rejected\u00a0the centers\u2019 emergency request to block the subpoena, denying it \u201cwithout prejudice to reconsideration by the merits panel and\/or the filing of a request for an expedited briefing schedule.\u201d\n<\/p>\n

Although the Supreme Court had initially\u00a0refused\u00a0without comment to take up the case in May 2024, the high court later\u00a0agreed\u00a0to hear oral arguments in the case in June.\n<\/p>\n

We prayed about this case on yesterday\u2019s episode of Headline Prayer Live. You can view that webcast in the embedded player below:<\/em>\n<\/p>\n

How are you praying about this case? Share your prayers and scriptures below.<\/h4>\n

This article was originally published at The Christian Post. Photo Credit: imenachi\/Getty Images via Canva Teams.<\/em>
\n \n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Reading Time: 4 minutes An attorney representing New Jersey before the U.S. Supreme Court has admitted that a pro-life pregnancy care center the state subpoenaed had no complaints leveled against it. This content is supported by your donations.Give today. \u00a0 The Supreme Court heard arguments on Tuesday morning in the case of\u00a0First Choice Women\u2019s Resource<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":11104,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[37],"tags":[728,2610,2534,2609,2074,1006,358],"class_list":["post-11103","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-prayer","tag-center","tag-complaints","tag-pregnancy","tag-received","tag-scotus","tag-targeted","tag-tells"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11103","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=11103"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11103\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/11104"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=11103"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=11103"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biblelon.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=11103"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}