Supreme Court Rules for Pro-Life Centers: 'The Gov't Has No Business Harassing Pro-Life Ministries'

Added: 2026-05-03

[00:00:01]The high court unanimously sided with New Jerseys First Choice Women's Resource Centers in its fight against a state investigation, requiring them to hand over their donor list. Alliance Defending Freedoms Aaron Holly represented the pregnancy centers before the high court. She called the ruling a resounding victory, saying the Constitution protects First Choice and its donors from demands by a hostile state office. first choice adding the Supreme Court recognized the government can't harass those who support prolife ministries.

[00:00:35]>> So, as we're going into Mother's Day, this is a time when we should be celebrating moms and celebrating organizations that are helping moms.

[00:00:44]>> Pro-life leaders say the ruling sets an important precedent.

[00:00:48]>> We are so grateful to First Choice Women's Resource Centers for their willingness to stand up against these aggressive actions. Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty, also involved in the case, said the ruling assures citizens their privacy will be protected.

[00:01:06]>> Limits the ability of the government to go after the lists of donors and people who partner with organizations like First Choice or other really important nonprofits that are doing incredible work um but might be touching in controversial areas. In addition to the pregnancy center ruling, the Supreme Court handed down its opinion on another important yet divisive issue, voter districtricting maps. In a 63 decision, the conservative justices struck down a majority black congressional district in Louisiana that stretches more than 200 miles from Shreveport to Baton Rouge, saying it relied too heavily on race. In the majority opinion, Justice Samuel Alo wrote that map is an unconstitutional gerrymander. The ruling weakens section two of the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 aimed at reducing discrimination in voting. In a disscent for the three liberal justices, Elena Kagan wrote, "The consequences are likely to be farreaching and grave. Today's decision renders section two all but a dead letter." The ruling comes as states nationwide are redrawing maps to gain partisan advantage in the midterm elections. Wednesday, the Florida legislature became the latest state to approve a congressional map. It gives Republicans an edge. Florida joins nine other states, some majority Democrat and some majority Republican, to create new district boundaries for elected offices to increase the potential for their party to gain seats in the House of Representatives and impact the balance of power in Washington. Lorie Johnson, CBN News.

[00:02:51]>> The redistricting race is on. Thank you, Lori. Gordon, back over to you. Well, that uh donor privacy ruling by the Supreme Court, I I can't underline how important that is. Uh what was happening was a a state agency wanted disclosure and and why they wanted a disclosure, they were hostile to it and and they wanted to make sure that they could cut off the funding. That is part of a long-term strategy. Now, go back to Prop 8 in Proposition 8 in California, which was designed to honor marriage and make same-sex marriage unconstitutional in the state of California.

[00:03:32]It passed uh to my amazement, the Ninth Circuit said a vote on on a state constitutional amendment by the population uh that was unconstitutional under the federal constitution. And so, it it got overturned. But any donor to support Prop 8 was then public record.

[00:03:54]And in that they all lost their jobs. Uh and and it became very serious even in Silicon Valley. And and what does a tech company have to do with same-sex marriage? But they lost their jobs. And and that's what the left is trying to do. It's the origin of what we call cancel culture where they're trying to deprive you of your civil liberties just because you speak up in the public square and say I want to defend same traditional marriage. I want to defend the right of infants to be born. I I want to have uh uh facilities available that will encourage mothers to give birth and and in that they want to target you. So, it's it's wonderful the Supreme Court has ruled no, these are private records. Uh, you don't get to go after them. You don't get to have this kind of disclosure. I I couldn't applaud it more. There's also a very wellestablished precedent for it. So, if you think it's some kind of new ruling, think again. The Federal Elections Commission when it was formed, uh, there was a carveout for the Communist Party.

[00:05:04]The Communist Party did not have to disclose their donors. Uh I think it was on the basis that well they weren't really going to have any influence but there would be obvious uh persecution against any donor to the communist party. So those records were sealed. Uh they weren't ever publicly dis disclosed. The Supreme Court said yes to that. So I you you look at these things.

[00:05:28]How do we protect minority interest but most importantly how do we protect the ability for people to have influence in the public square? influence based on the dictates of their conscience. That's a fundamental American right.