Morning Wire Episode Summary

Podcast: Morning Wire
Episode: Weaponizing Government Against Pro-Lifers? Supreme Court Presses New Jersey
Date: December 6, 2025
Hosts: John Bickley, Georgia Howe (The Daily Wire)
Guest: Aaron Hawley (General Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom)

Episode Overview

This episode examines a significant Supreme Court case involving First Choice Women's Resource Centers and New Jersey's Democrat Attorney General, Matt Platkin. The discussion centers on whether government officials are weaponizing state power to target pro-life organizations, specifically examining the implications of subpoenas demanding extensive sensitive records from a Christian nonprofit. Aaron Hawley of the Alliance Defending Freedom—who previously argued to overturn Roe v. Wade—offers legal insights, recounts oral arguments, and discusses broader patterns of governmental hostility toward pro-life groups.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Case Background and Stakes

• First Choice alleges that New Jersey’s AG targeted them due to their religious, pro-life stance by issuing a sweeping subpoena for ten years of donor records, with no evidence of wrongdoing.
  • [01:32] John Bickley: “The case pits First Choice Women's Resource Centers against New Jersey's Democrat Attorney General Matt Platkin...based on its religious speech and pro life views.”
• Potential Precedent: The Supreme Court’s decision may impact how states can subpoena, investigate, or harass pregnancy centers and similar organizations across the country.

2. Oral Arguments—Justice Reactions

• Favorable Lines of Questioning:
  • Justice Barrett questioned New Jersey’s “hostility” and highlighted the context of AG actions resembling a “declared war on pregnancy centers.”
    • [04:10] Aaron Hawley: “Justice Barrett…pointed out the hostility that New Jersey has shown toward pregnancy care centers...declared war on pregnancy centers.”
  • Justice Jackson raised concerns that federal courts might be inaccessible for constitutional claims if state actions block entry—an access to justice argument.
    • [04:55] Aaron Hawley: “Justice Jackson seemed very concerned...because of various legal doctrines, you can never come back to federal court.”
  • Justice Kagan referenced the potential chilling effect of being forced to disclose donor names, making a strong free speech point.
    • [05:19] Aaron Hawley: “If I receive a subpoena that demands donor names...this is going to chill the First Amendment rights of recipients...”

3. Notable Moments & Quotes

• Lack of Complaint: No specific complaints were lodged against First Choice, but the state initiated intrusive legal action regardless—a key point pressed by Justice Thomas.
  • [06:03] Aaron Hawley: “The New Jersey Attorney General has never said that he received a single complaint against First Choice by anyone.”
  • [06:18] (Paraphrased exchange)
    • Justice Thomas: “Did you have complaints that formed the basis…?”
    • NJ Attorney General: “We haven’t had complaints about this specific [center].”
• Important Precedent:
  • [06:56] Aaron Hawley: “There’s a case called Americans for Prosperity...that case protected the donor information...the court said, no, that’s protected information under the First Amendment.”

4. Broader Pattern of Government Targeting Pro-Lifers

• Pattern of Subpoenas and Harassment: New York and Washington AGs also filed lawsuits or sent sweeping subpoenas aimed at pregnancy centers, requiring them to expend large resources defending their basic First Amendment rights.
  • [08:55] Aaron Hawley: “…sometimes the process is part of the punishment…the litigation has been going on for two years…over 50 something briefs filed…that is a ton of burden on a nonprofit which seems to be part of the point.”

5. Planned Parenthood’s Role & State of the Movement

• AGs’ Coordination with Planned Parenthood: Allegation that New Jersey AG essentially consulted Planned Parenthood in shaping strategy against pregnancy centers.
• Planned Parenthood's Decline?: While still politically significant, recent reports and legal defeats reveal internal issues and setbacks in several states.
  • [10:39] Aaron Hawley: “It’s an expose on Planned Parenthood…it talks about terrible conditions not only for women…bad healthcare…not well run.”

6. Momentum on Pro-Life Legal Rights

• Recent Legal Wins:
  • Parental Rights: Mahmood case upheld religious parents' rights regarding school curriculum ([11:31]).
  • Funding Choice: Medina case confirmed states can defund Planned Parenthood in favor of comprehensive health centers.
  • Court Vigilance: Courts increasingly recognize that administrative harassment of pro-life centers infringes on constitutional rights, but “it seems to be taking courts to step in and police those boundaries.” ([11:31]–[12:35])

Memorable Quotes with Timestamps

• Aaron Hawley [04:10]:

  “Justice Barrett…pointed out the hostility that New Jersey has shown toward pregnancy care centers…the attorney general had essentially…declared war on pregnancy centers.”

• Aaron Hawley [05:19]:

  “If I receive a subpoena that demands donor names, I don’t want my name and address and phone number out there…this is going to chill the First Amendment rights of recipients in sort of a common sense way.”

• Aaron Hawley [06:03]:

  “The New Jersey Attorney General has never said that he received a single complaint against First Choice by anyone. And so Justice Thomas really leaned into that and asked the New Jersey attorney.”

• Aaron Hawley [08:55]:

  “Sometimes the process is part of the punishment…the litigation has been going on for two years…over 50 something briefs filed in the case…that is a ton of burden on a nonprofit which seems to be part of the point.”

• Aaron Hawley [11:31]:

  "I think we are seeing momentum building…there seems to be the sort of recognition that even if you dislike pregnancy care centers, you can't harass them with subpoenas, you can't sue them to stop them from speaking…But it seems to be taking courts to step in and police those boundaries."

Timeline of Key Segments

• [01:32] – Introduction to the Supreme Court case and New Jersey’s actions
• [03:28] – Guest Aaron Hawley joins, discusses case background and oral arguments
• [04:10] – Justices’ questioning and their implications for First Amendment protections
• [06:03] – Lack of complaints and intrusive subpoenas
• [08:38] – Discussion on broader state trends targeting pro-life groups
• [10:15] – Planned Parenthood’s role and current status
• [11:31] – Momentum and recent court victories for pro-lifers

Conclusion

The episode provides a comprehensive look at a Supreme Court case that could reshape how states interact with pro-life organizations. Both judicial questioning and recent case law signal increasing scrutiny of government attempts to chill pro-life speech and activities via legal harassment. Aaron Hawley and the Daily Wire team argue that, regardless of one's stance on abortion, the constitutional implications—particularly regarding free speech and due process—are profound. The episode closes with optimism for the pro-life legal movement but acknowledges the ongoing need for vigilant court oversight.