The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) is urging New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill, a Democrat, to veto a bill the group says would threaten parental rights, free speech, interstate law enforcement, and conscience protections for pro-life medical providers.
In a June 18 letter to Sherrill, the ACLJ said it was writing on behalf of more than 640,000 supporters and urged the governor to announce that she would veto the bill if it reaches her desk because of “the threat that it poses” to these rights and protections.
S2260, which passed the state Senate in May and advanced in the Assembly in June, would increase legal protections for patients and providers of “reproductive health care” services, including abortion and treatments that support a person’s “gender identity or expression.” Supporters say the bill is intended to shield patients and doctors in New Jersey from legal action by states with stronger pro-life or parental consent laws, but the ACLJ argues the measure goes too far.
The ACLJ said in a June 19 statement that the bill could prevent New Jersey state officials from assisting with out-of-state investigations or enforcement actions involving minors who travel to New Jersey for “reproductive health” procedures without parental consent.
“This undermines parental rights nationwide and erodes interstate comity, turning New Jersey into a potential haven that frustrates the enforcement of other states’ legitimate laws,” the ACLJ said. “The U.S. Supreme Court returned abortion policy to the states; New Jersey should not retaliate against states exercising that authority by obstructing cooperation.”
The ACLJ also warned that the bill defines “reproductive health care services” as services that comply with “applicable professional standards of care.” According to the group, that language could be used against pro-life doctors or pregnancy resource centers that offer abortion pill reversal, since some medical organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, have rejected the practice as unsupported by evidence.
“By tying protections to subjective or contested ‘professional standards,’ the bill equips licensing boards and regulators to target pro-life providers who deviate from abortion-friendly norms – while shielding those providing abortions,” the group said. “This viewpoint discrimination threatens conscience rights and could chill ethical, life-affirming alternatives for women.”