Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the John Locke Foundation. The author of this post is Jeanette Doran.
- Government overreach threatens the fundamental right of Americans to support causes privately without fear of retaliation
- History shows that forced disclosure of donors and supporters undermines free speech and endangers citizens
- The Supreme Court must reaffirm that the First Amendment protects all viewpoints from intimidation and political abuse
At the John Locke Foundation, we believe that the government's first duty is to protect freedom, not trample on it. That's why the case of First Choice Women's Resource Centers v. Platkin, now before the U.S. Supreme Court, is so important and why Locke proudly joined dozens of liberty-minded organizations to file an amicus brief urging the Court to protect free speech and donor privacy.
In New Jersey, the state's attorney general, Matthew Platkin, has demanded years of private records from First Choice, a network of pro-life pregnancy centers. His demand included donor information about nearly 5,000 contributions. No matter where you stand on the issue of abortion, this kind of government fishing expedition should alarm you.
Why? Because it's not about enforcing the law. It's about sending a message: If you dare to support a cause the government doesn't like, you could pay the price. That chills free speech, stifles free association, and undermines the very liberty our Constitution is meant to protect.
This case isn't just about one organization in New Jersey. It's about whether government can weaponize its power against viewpoints it dislikes.
History shows us why donor privacy matters. In the civil rights era, the state of Alabama tried to force the NAACP to hand over its membership lists. The U.S. Supreme Court struck that down, recognizing that exposure would have put supporters at risk of harassment, intimidation, and worse. The same principle applies here. Americans have the right to support causes privately without fearing retaliation.
If Attorney General Platkin can get away with this, what's to stop other politicians from targeting groups they disagree with, whether they're pro-life, pro-choice, environmentalist, or religious? Once that door is opened, no one's freedom is safe.
At Locke, we believe in limited government, free expression, and equal justice under the law. Supporting this amicus brief is about standing up for those principles. Government power must have limits. Officials should not be allowed to use investigatory tools to punish their political opponents.
Donors deserve privacy. Citizens should be able to support causes they care about without fearing exposure or harassment. We now live in an era of doxing, when private information about individuals is spread on the internet, often for the express intent of encouraging extremists to harass those individuals.
The courts must be a check. We can't wait until rights are trampled before acting. Federal courts exist to stop abuse of power before it causes irreparable harm.
We saw this threat coming here in North Carolina. That's why lawmakers passed the Personal Privacy Protection Act over Gov. Josh Stein's veto. It protects citizens' rights to support causes they believe in without fear of harassment or retribution. It was a legislative recognition that liberty requires privacy.
New Jersey's heavy-handed tactics prove why laws like ours are necessary. If government officials can weaponize their power against groups they dislike, no one's free speech is safe.
This case isn't just about New Jersey, and it isn't just about pro-life centers. It's about whether the First Amendment still protects Americans from government intimidation. The Supreme Court now has the chance to remind every state that the First Amendment is not optional but foundational to our liberty. Just as North Carolina's General Assembly has chosen to protect its citizens from government intimidation, the Supreme Court should rule for First Choice and remind government officials everywhere that their job is to safeguard liberty, not punish dissent.
If the Supreme Court rules for First Choice, it will send a clear message: government cannot bully citizens into silence. That would be good news not only for pro-life groups, but for every American who values freedom of thought, speech, and association.
At the John Locke Foundation, we'll continue to stand with those who resist government overreach because liberty, once lost, is rarely regained.
poll#220
