All 9 justices agree: State pols can’t freely harass opponents, demand donor info

In an important First Amendment victory, the Supreme Court just ruled unanimously last week that state officials who harass their ideological opponents by demanding private donor information will be held accountable in federal court.

My law firm, Alliance Defending Freedom, had the privilege of representing First Choice Women’s Resource Centers before the high court. For more than two years then-New Jersey attorney general Matthew Platkin, targeted First Choice, a collection of five faith-based pregnancy centers in the state. Without any evidence of wrongdoing, he issued a baseless, coercive subpoena demanding that the ministry disclose the names, phone numbers, addresses, and places of employment of many of its donors, in addition to up to 10 years of its internal confidential documents.

The state of New Jersey demanded this information even though the Supreme Court had already admonished California’s attorney general for requiring the disclosure of nonprofit donor identities just five years ago. Such a requirement violates the First Amendment and the protected right to anonymous association.

In its unanimous ruling, the court recognized that such a demand runs afoul of the First Amendment by chilling the pregnancy centers’ and individuals’ freedom to privately donate to the nonprofit of their choice without fear of government harassment.

“By restricting how First Choice may interact privately with its donors, the attorney general’s subpoena burdened First Choice’s associational rights,” Justice Neil........

© The Hill