The Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Wednesday that First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, a New Jersey-based faith-oriented antiabortion nonprofit, may challenge a subpoena seeking the identities of its donors. The order enables the organization to pursue its claim in federal court that the subpoena, issued by New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin, violates its First Amendment rights by chilling free speech and association.

The dispute centers on a subpoena Platkin issued in 2023, part of an investigation into whether First Choice was misleading clients and donors by implying it offered abortion referrals, which the center denies. The attorney general’s request sought donor records to determine if contributions were obtained under false pretenses. First Choice, which operates five centers in New Jersey providing pregnancy-related resources but not abortion services, refused to comply, arguing that revealing donor identities could intimidate supporters and thus infringe constitutional protections.

Lower courts had ruled against the nonprofit, stating that the group had not yet suffered a concrete injury because the subpoena had not been enforced by a state court order compelling disclosure. However, the Supreme Court found that the threat alone of disclosure was sufficient to constitute harm under the “ripeness” doctrine, allowing First Choice to seek relief in federal court without first exhausting state remedies.

In the majority opinion, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch emphasized the importance of protecting the confidentiality of association as a core First Amendment right, echoing longstanding legal principles that the mere existence of a subpoena can chill protected activities. The Court rejected New Jersey’s argument that compliance was voluntary pending court enforcement, noting that a subpoena carries inherent coercive weight and that individuals or organizations fearing disclosure may self-censor or lose supporters.

The case attracted attention from a broad array of advocacy groups across the political spectrum. Although the American Civil Liberties Union does not share First Choice’s antiabortion stance, it supported the nonprofit in an amicus brief, warning that expansive subpoenas for donor information could threaten free speech and association rights of all advocacy organizations.

First Choice and similar “crisis pregnancy centers” often rely on private donations to provide pregnancy support services aimed at discouraging abortion. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision overturning Roe v. Wade, these centers have gained increased public funding in some states, while abortion rights advocates have intensified scrutiny of their practices and messaging. Tensions between these groups have resulted in legal battles nationwide, including a recent First Amendment lawsuit by pregnancy centers in Massachusetts that was dismissed by a federal judge.

New Jersey officials maintain that the investigation aims to prevent deceptive practices toward consumers and donors, asserting that the subpoena is a legitimate tool to ensure transparency. Attorney General Platkin has pledged confidentiality for any records collected and dismissed claims that targeting First Choice reflected political hostility, although he has previously characterized some antiabortion groups as extremists.

The Supreme Court’s decision highlights ongoing legal and cultural conflicts surrounding reproductive rights and the scope of state investigative authority, reaffirming the courts’ role in balancing government interests with constitutional protections for privacy and free association.