Pregnancy centers are beacons of light in their communities. They advocate for society’s most vulnerable, support pregnant mothers, and provide a variety of resources for new parents. In Delaware, one such center is called A Door of Hope.
A Door of Hope is a Christian ministry that empowers men and women to make life-affirming decisions and helps mothers facing unplanned pregnancies. The ministry provides both medical and non-medical services, and it advertises these services through print and digital media.
But a new Delaware law violates the rights of Door of Hope and other pregnancy centers in multiple ways, both compelling the content of their speech and violating their religious freedom.
Delaware’s draconian law
Delaware’s SB 300, set to take effect in March, specifically addresses what it calls “crisis pregnancy centers,” another term for pregnancy centers. By definition, these centers are pro-life; there is no such thing as a pro-abortion crisis pregnancy center. And the law is tailored to apply only to pregnancy centers—not to facilities that provide abortions.
Why was this law deemed important? We don’t have to guess. As one of the bill’s co-sponsors claimed, SB 300 was necessary because pregnancy centers discourage women from having abortions.
The law stipulates that it only applies to facilities without a licensed medical provider on staff. But the law plays fast and loose with the definition of “licensed medical provider.” For example, SB 300 includes ultrasound technicians, who do not have to be licensed by the state, but excludes registered nurses, who are required to be licensed.
The mandatory disclaimer
Under SB 300, pregnancy centers must publish a wordy disclaimer stating that the facility is not medically licensed. That disclaimer must be “posted conspicuously in the entrance of the facility” and must also appear in print advertisements and “digital advertising materials,” which the law does not define.
Depending on the circumstances, publishing the statement would often be a serious burden or even a nearly impossible task. Google advertisements, for example, are limited to 120 characters. But the mandatory disclaimer alone contains 175 characters. Requiring the disclaimer in this instance essentially prohibits pregnancy centers from advertising with Google entirely.
Applied to Door of Hope, the disclaimer isn’t even true. A Door of Hope does have licensed medical professionals on staff. But because those professionals are registered nurses, they don’t “count” under SB 300. Even if the required statement were accurate, however, it would still be unconstitutional.
Violating free speech and free exercise
By compelling pregnancy centers to utter a government-dictated (and untrue) message—on pain of government penalty—Delaware’s law violates our clients’ right to free speech under the First Amendment. Its regulation of speech based on content is likewise unconstitutional. And by applying only to pregnancy centers, SB 300 unconstitutionally discriminates based on viewpoint.
What’s more, the law forces some pregnancy centers to lie, burdening their free exercise of religion. Compelling A Door of Hope to say it has no “licensed medical providers,” when in fact the center does employ registered nurses that provide and oversee its medical services, forces the center to violate its religious beliefs by sharing a falsehood.
Supreme Court precedent
ADF has a history of challenging unconstitutional laws similar to SB 300. By God’s grace, we’ve seen success.
In 2017, ADF attorneys argued National Institutes of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra before the U.S. Supreme Court. In that case, NIFLA was challenging a California law that required an advertising disclaimer similar to Delaware’s. The Court overturned the law and wrote that “the people lose when the government is deciding which ideas should prevail.”
Nearly a decade later, that statement is still true. The government has no business deciding which ideas should prevail. And it certainly has no business censoring pro-life pregnancy centers dedicated to serving mothers and their unborn babies.
National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Jennings
- February 2025: Attorneys with Simms Showers and ADF filed a lawsuit challenging Delaware’s SB 300.
