Pro-life center fights New Jersey attorney general's 'fishing expedition' in Supreme Court battle
NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. — The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments Tuesday in a case involving New Jersey pregnancy resource centers challenging actions by the state’s Democratic leadership that...
By Fox News · Fox News
NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. — The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments Tuesday in a case involving New Jersey pregnancy resource centers challenging actions by the state’s Democratic leadership that they say violate their constitutional rights. First Choice Women's Resource Centers, a nonprofit comprising five facilities across north and central New Jersey, has been wrapped up since 2023 in the dispute over an investigative subpoena issued by Attorney General Matthew Platkin, who alleges the nonprofit could be defrauding its donors. First Choice counters that the inquiry is baseless and a First Amendment threat because it has rattled donors, who have kept the centers afloat for four decades. During a tour of the New Brunswick center, First Choice Executive Director Aimee Huber told Fox News Digital that Platkin’s subpoena — seeking donor names, contact information and employment records — is unjustified. "I think it's important to realize that there have been no complaints that have been cited by the attorney general against First Choice, not one," Huber said. "So, when we received the subpoena, it was clearly a fishing expedition. There were no complaints by donors or clients." The Supreme Court is weighing a technicality over whether the subpoena fight should play out in state or federal court. In state court, the New Jersey attorney general could have the upper hand. Dalton Nichols, a lawyer on the case who works for the conservative group Alliance Defending Freedom, told Fox News Digital Platkin’s demand was "egregious" and that it was crucial that First Choice have its day in federal court to make its First Amendment claim. Nichols said: "this is bigger than just a state court versus federal court issue." "This could have implications that impact other claims [over] any invasive requests for donor names like that, so a loss for First Choice in this case could be a bit more far-reaching than just state court versus federal court," Nichols said. "It's getting at wheth…