logo
Supreme Court agrees to hear appeal from New Jersey faith-based pregnancy center

Supreme Court agrees to hear appeal from New Jersey faith-based pregnancy center

Associated Press5 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Monday it will hear from a faith-based pregnancy center in New Jersey challenging a state investigation alleging it misled people into thinking its services included referrals for abortion.
The justices agreed to consider an appeal from First Choice Women's Resource Centers, which wants to block a 2023 subpoena from New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin seeking information about donors, advertisements and medical personnel. It has not yet been served.
Attorneys for First Choice Women's Resource Centers describe the organization as a 'faith-based, pro-life pregnancy center.' The organization generally seek to women facing an unwanted pregnancy away from choosing an abortion.
The group challenged the subpoena in federal court, but a judge found that the case wasn't yet far enough along to weigh in. An appeals court agreed.
First Choice Women's Resource Centers appealed to the Supreme Court, saying the push for donor information had chilled its First Amendment rights.
'State attorneys general on both sides of the political aisle have been accused of misusing this authority to issue demands against their ideological and political opponents,' its lawyers wrote. 'Even if these accusations turn out to be false, it is important that a federal forum exists for suits challenging those investigative demands.'.
Meanwhile, Platkin has sought to enforce the subpoena in state court, but the judge there has so far refused the state's push to require the group to turn over documents and told the two sides to negotiate instead.
The state asked the justices to pass on the case, saying the it doesn't present the kind of significant lower-court controversy that requires the justices to step in.
'The decision below is correct and does not have the impacts petitioner alleges,' state attorneys wrote.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Harvard Judge Says Foreign Student Ban Likely to Harm School
Harvard Judge Says Foreign Student Ban Likely to Harm School

Yahoo

time27 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Harvard Judge Says Foreign Student Ban Likely to Harm School

(Bloomberg) -- A federal judge said that Harvard University is likely to show that it will suffer irreparable harm if the government is able to stop international students from attending the Ivy League school. As Part of a $45 Billion Push, ICE Prepares for a Vast Expansion of Detention Space As American Architects Gather in Boston, Retrofits Are All the Rage US District Judge Allison Burroughs said at a hearing Monday that the government has an 'uphill battle' on the issue, a key factor in whether she will extend her temporary order preventing the Trump administration from refusing to give foreign students visas to attend the university. Burroughs said she would rule on whether to issue a preliminary injunction by June 23. Harvard is the main target of President Donald Trump's efforts to force universities to crack down on antisemitism, remove perceived political bias and eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs. The US has already frozen more than $2.6 billion in federal research funding at Harvard, the subject of a separate lawsuit before Burroughs. Ian Gershengorn, a university lawyer, said the cumulative effect of the Trump administration's actions has been 'devastating' and caused 'irreparable harm.' 'What we have suffered over the last two months is the most improper and irregular treatment a university has probably ever suffered' at the hands of the government, Gershengorn said at the hearing in Boston. On June 4, Trump issued a proclamation blocking Harvard's foreign students and researchers from entering the country, saying the school's refusal to provide records about international student misconduct poses a national security risk. Earlier, the administration revoked the school's ability to sponsor their visas. On June 6, Burroughs issued a temporary restraining order, saying Harvard would face 'immediate and irreparable injury' if the proclamation went into effect. That order was scheduled to expire later this week, but a government lawyer agreed at Monday's hearing to allow the judge to extend it to June 23 while she prepares her ruling. The US claims that antisemitism, rising crime and Harvard's 'entanglements with foreign adversaries' like China make it a national security risk and undeserving of international students. Harvard argues that the US is retaliating because the school exercised its First Amendment rights to reject government demands to control Harvard's governance, curriculum, and the viewpoints of its faculty and students. 'You cannot take unlawful action in retaliation for protected speech,' Gershengorn said. The question, he said, is whether that protected activity was a substantial and motivating factor for the government's actions. The government argues that Harvard hasn't tackled problems of antisemitism and a lack of viewpoint diversity on campus. A Department of Justice lawyer, Tiberius Davis, echoed a June 14 court filing by the government, saying the US doesn't 'trust' the school to host foreign students. 'Unrest on Campus' 'They have a lot of unrest on campus, they have a lot of antisemitic activity on campus,' Davis told Burroughs. 'We believe that they continue to engage in discriminatory admissions.' Burroughs said to Davis: 'I can't imagine that anything you've described applies only to Harvard.' 'It's worse there,' Davis said. Harvard, he said, has not provided adequate information to review the monitoring and discipline process of students. The university, he said, has only turned over disciplinary records on three students. 'The idea that there's only three disciplinary actions, we don't frankly credit that,' Davis said. 'We don't trust them to host foreign students where we think other universities might be better.' Government lawyers said in their June 14 filing that Trump's proclamation is 'well within' the president's authority to govern the immigration system and foreign affairs of the US. 'The Trump administration is committed to restoring common sense to our student visa system; no lawsuit, this or any other, is going to change that,' wrote Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Tricia McLaughlin in an email after Monday's oral arguments. 'We have the law, the facts, and common sense on our side.' The case is Harvard v. US Department of Homeland Security, 25-cv-11472, US District Court, District of Massachusetts (Boston). (Updates with details of hearing, comments from student and Homeland Security spokeswoman) American Mid: Hampton Inn's Good-Enough Formula for World Domination The Spying Scandal Rocking the World of HR Software How a Tiny Middleman Could Access Two-Factor Login Codes From Tech Giants US Allies and Adversaries Are Dodging Trump's Tariff Threats As Companies Abandon Climate Pledges, Is There a Silver Lining? ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.

Senate Deadlocked on SALT, With Draft Bill Showing Current $10,000 Cap
Senate Deadlocked on SALT, With Draft Bill Showing Current $10,000 Cap

Bloomberg

timean hour ago

  • Bloomberg

Senate Deadlocked on SALT, With Draft Bill Showing Current $10,000 Cap

The Senate's version of President Donald Trump's tax bill calls for a $10,000 cap on the state and local tax deduction — a placeholder figure as Republicans remain divided over the valuable tax break. The draft bill — slated to be released later on Monday — includes the current $10,000 SALT cap, according to a person familiar with the matter. But the Senate will continue to negotiate the deduction as it aims to pass the legislation by a self-imposed July 4 deadline.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store