Lawsuit filed against Del. says state targets pro-life pregnancy centers

A federal lawsuit against the state of Delaware was filed Wednesday by attorneys representing a nonprofit pregnancy center and a network of affiliated centers.

The lawsuit challenges Delaware’s Senate Bill 300, which they argue unconstitutionally restricts free speech and forces the centers to convey messages against their core mission.

The lawsuit, filed by Simms Showers and Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), targets the state’s law that, according to the plaintiffs, forces pro-life pregnancy centers to display misleading disclaimers regarding their services.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA), a nonprofit religious network of pregnancy care centers, including A Door of Hope, a Wilmington-based center.

The plaintiffs claim the law infringes on their constitutional rights by compelling them to post disclaimers in their facilities and advertising, stating that they do not have a licensed medical provider directly overseeing their services.

“This law is unconstitutional, plain and simple,” said William R. Thetford, senior associate at Simms Showers and lead counsel in the case. “The pro-life pregnancy centers we represent offer families life-affirming care and resources during difficult times. We are asking the court to uphold their fundamental right to continue their mission without the threat of government punishment.”

READ: 6 trains to run from Wilmington to Philly for Eagles parade Friday

Delaware’s Senate Bill 300, set to take effect in March, requires the pregnancy centers to disclose that they do not employ a licensed medical professional to oversee their services, a mandate that plaintiffs argue is unnecessary, misleading, and burdensome.

The lawsuit contends that the law is not based on concerns about improper behavior, but is instead an attempt to target centers for their pro-life stance on pregnancy.

“The government is trying to silence us because of our beliefs,” said Rachel Metzger, executive director of A Door of Hope. “Our mission is to empower women to make life-affirming decisions. This law is an unlawful attempt to restrict our free speech simply because we hold a pro-life viewpoint.”

This legal challenge follows similar cases in other states, such as California, New York, and New Jersey, where laws requiring pro-life centers to make disclosures about their services have been disputed.

ADF Senior Counsel Kevin Theriot emphasized the broader implications, warning that Delaware’s law mirrors provisions struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 2018 case NIFLA v. Becerra. In that case, the court ruled that the government cannot force pro-life centers to issue compelled speech, citing violations of free speech protections.

The plaintiffs argue that Delaware’s law is part of a broader national trend of targeting pro-life centers following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

The lawsuit claims that the law disproportionately affects centers that offer alternatives to abortion while giving pro-abortion groups and advocates a pass.

Anne O’Connor, Vice President of Legal Affairs at NIFLA, criticized the law for attempting to undermine pregnancy centers’ vital work.

“Delaware’s law is unconstitutional and silences centers that provide essential, non-judgmental services for women facing unplanned pregnancies,” O’Connor said. “Instead of penalizing centers, Delaware should be focused on supporting women and families in need.”

A Door of Hope offers free, non-judgmental services to women facing unplanned pregnancies, including pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, parenting classes, adoption information, and post-abortion support.

The center’s staff consists of a volunteer medical doctor, radiologist, and registered nurses who provide medical services. According to the center, Delaware’s law is an attempt to penalize them for offering life-affirming alternatives to abortion.

The lawsuit, National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Jennings, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, with Andrew Meck serving as local counsel.

The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction to prevent the law from going into effect and to protect their constitutional right to free speech.