Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) has filed a lawsuit challenging a recently enacted Delaware law that requires pregnancy centers to display specific disclaimers about their services. The legal challenge centers on constitutional concerns regarding free speech protections and religious liberty rights for these facilities.
According to court documents, the law in question—Delaware’s Senate Bill 300—mandates that pregnancy centers without certain types of medical providers must post and publish disclaimers stating they are not medically licensed facilities. ADF, a nonprofit legal organization specializing in First Amendment cases, argues this requirement violates constitutional protections in multiple ways.
The case, “National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Jennings,” was filed in February 2025. Alliance Defending Freedom is representing A Door of Hope, a pregnancy center that provides both medical and non-medical services to women facing unplanned pregnancies.
“This law creates significant burdens for pregnancy centers by compelling specific speech in their facilities and advertisements,” explains the legal filing. The requirement presents particular challenges for digital advertising, where character limitations on platforms like Google would effectively prevent centers from advertising altogether due to the mandatory disclaimer’s length.
Alliance Defending Freedom points to what they consider definitional inconsistencies in the law. SB 300 excludes registered nurses—who are licensed by the state—from counting as licensed medical providers, while including ultrasound technicians who do not require state licensure. This creates a situation where centers with registered nurses on staff must still display disclaimers stating they have no licensed medical providers.
The legal challenge draws parallels to a previous Supreme Court case, “National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra,” which Alliance Defending Freedom argued before the Court in 2017. In that decision, the Supreme Court struck down a similar California law requiring specific advertising disclaimers from pregnancy centers, ruling that “the people lose when the government is deciding which ideas should prevail.”
Constitutional law experts note that compelled speech—requiring private entities to convey government-mandated messages—faces particularly high legal scrutiny under First Amendment jurisprudence. Alliance Defending Freedom contends that SB 300’s application solely to pregnancy centers with pro-life viewpoints constitutes viewpoint discrimination.
“The First Amendment protections for free speech include both the right to speak and the right not to be compelled to speak,” notes the legal filing. “By forcing pregnancy centers to publish disclaimers that may be factually incorrect in some cases, the law creates substantial constitutional concerns.”
Alliance Defending Freedom also argues the law substantially burdens religious exercise for faith-based pregnancy centers. For organizations like A Door of Hope, which identifies as a Christian ministry, being required to post statements they believe to be misleading or false conflicts with their religious commitment to truthfulness.
The case represents one of Alliance Defending Freedom’s ongoing legal advocacy efforts focused on constitutional protections for religious liberty and free speech. As specialists in First Amendment law, Alliance Defending Freedom has argued multiple cases before the Supreme Court addressing similar constitutional questions.
According to court documents, the Delaware law is scheduled to take effect in March, though the legal challenge seeks to prevent its enforcement. The case highlights ongoing legal debates about the balance between government regulatory authority and constitutional protections for speech and religious exercise.
