Justice Thomas Exposes Democrat Officials For Having No Basis To Investigate Pro-Life Pregnancy Center

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas pressed a representative of the New Jersey Attorney General’s office to admit on Tuesday that the state had no basis to investigate a pro-life pregnancy center.

Sundeep Iyer, chief counsel to the state attorney general, conceded that they did not receive a single complaint about First Choice Women’s Resource Centers before issuing a subpoena for its donors, though they received complaints about other centers.

“So you had no basis to think that they were deceiving any of their contributors?” Thomas probed. Iyer said the center’s public website appeared misleading.

In First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Platkin, the justices are weighing whether a state court must enforce New Jersey’s subpoena before the pregnancy center can challenge it in federal court.

Democratic New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin issued a subpoena in November 2023 directing the pregnancy center to turn over years worth of internal documents, including information associated with nearly 5,000 donations, according to the center’s petition.

The center argues the subpoena chills their First Amendment rights and violates their right of association. New Jersey claims the subpoena is not self-executing and can’t yet be challenged in federal court.

Justice Thomas forces the New Jersey AG’s chief counsel to admit the state issued a subpoena for a pro-life pregnancy center’s donors without receiving a single complaint about the organization.

“So you had no basis to think that they were deceiving any of their contributors?”… pic.twitter.com/oN5TAt1RPm

— Katelynn Richardson (@katesrichardson) December 2, 2025

A majority of justices seemed sympathetic to the pregnancy center’s challenge.

“An ordinary person, one of the funders of this organization or any similar organization, presented with this subpoena and then told ‘but don’t worry, it has to be stamped by a court,’ is not going to take that as very reassuring,” Justice Elena Kagan said.

‘War On Pregnancy Centers’ 

Pro-life organizations have pointed to the case as another example of Democrats waging a “campaign of harassment” against pregnancy centers. First Choice also highlights that the subpoena was not issued in isolation.

“The Attorney General had essentially, what your friends on the other side would say, declared war on pregnancy centers,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett noted, pointing out the subpoena was issued in the context of other allegedly hostile activities.

As part of a “Strike Force” to promote abortion access after Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022, a “consumer alert” was issued warning the state that pregnancy centers do not provide abortions. Platkin signed onto a 2023 letter that accused pregnancy centers of “misleading consumers.”

“My friends on the other side don’t let the actual factual allegations get in the way of telling a story about hostility,” Iyer replied.

“I believe we were targeted because we’re making an impact.”

New Jersey’s attorney general has made no secret of his hostility towards pregnancy centers, but First Choice is defending its freedom to serve women and families without government interference or harassment.

The… pic.twitter.com/ozH8yWEMtp

— Alliance Defending Freedom (@ADFLegal) November 28, 2025

Pro-life pregnancy centers provided an estimated $452 million worth of services to around 1 million new clients in 2024, according to a November report. Nearly 100 pro-life centers and groups have faced attacks since the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision was leaked in 2022, according to Catholic Vote.

First Choice’s case is not the only litigation pregnancy centers have faced.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals allowed pregnancy centers sued by New York Attorney General Letitia James on Monday to tell women about abortion pill reversal using progesterone. Colorado attempted to ban abortion pill reversal, though a federal judge struck down the ban in August.

Along with implications for the freedom of association, First Choice’s raises concerns of donor privacy that have led even some left-leaning organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union to back the pregnancy center’s claim.

“‘[Using] using the subpoena power—or any other power—to censor, regulate, or chill disfavored speech violates the First Amendment,” the ACLU and Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression argued in an amicus brief. “That’s precisely what First Choice has alleged in this case, and it’s sufficient to state a justiciable First Amendment claim.”

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].