NEW YORK (AP) – The U.S. government violates the free-speech rights of key partners in its international fight against AIDS, lawyers for three health organizations say of a government rule forcing groups to denounce prostitution.

Lawyer Rebekah Diller asked a judge to reject the policy as unconstitutional, saying the groups receiving government funding want to speak freely but find themselves restricted by “a First Amendment nightmare.”

Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard E. Rosberger, arguing for the government, said no provision of the 2003 law containing the pledge requirement was meant to discourage the treatment of those with AIDS, including prostitutes.

To reduce behavioral risks associated with HIV and AIDS, the United States formed a policy to eradicate prostitution and sex trafficking, he said.

“This is the U.S. government’s response to a terrible crisis,” Rosberger said. “And the U.S. has the responsibility in meeting that response to select the partners that it thinks will be the most appropriate in accomplishing the mission that was set out for them, and one of those missions is eradicating prostitution.”

Diller said the plaintiffs – the Alliance for Open Society International Inc., Open Society Institute and Pathfinder International – have adopted policies acknowledging prostitution’s harms but object to being told how to execute them.

“It’s one thing to say you’re opposed to prostitution. It’s another thing to say there’s only one approach to prostitution, and that’s what the defendants have said here,” Diller told U.S. Judge Victor Marrero, who did not immediately rule.

Pathfinder International, the largest of the three groups, is based in Watertown, Mass. It does work in more than 20 countries with 600 employees and an annual budget of $76 million.

The groups say the policy would prevent anyone from advocating the legalization of prostitution or urging those working in the sex trafficking business to organize or unionize.

As part of its case, the public health organizations submitted a declaration from Pedro Chequer, director of the Brazilian government’s National Aids Programme.

In it, Chequer said Brazil turned down $40 million in badly needed aid from the United States because its partner organizations would be “forced to state their explicit opposition to prostitution.”

He added: “One of the major reasons for the success we have had in containing the epidemic has been our accepting approach toward groups that are at high risk for the spread of HIV/AIDS, including sex workers, injection drug users and men who have sex with men. We view sex workers as essential partners in our HIV prevention efforts.”

After Congress passed the bill, it was immediately applied to foreign aid recipients, but the Department of Justice questioned the constitutionality of applying it to domestic organizations. In late 2004, the department cleared the government to implement the requirement domestically. The lawsuit was brought in Manhattan in September. A similar lawsuit is pending in Washington.

The rule now affects private U.S. groups conducting AIDS programs overseas. To qualify for federal money, a group must first adopt a statement saying it opposes prostitution and sex trafficking. Then it must sign a form for the government promising it has the policy. Only then is the organization eligible for funding.

Besides the pledge, the new rules require AIDS groups to inform clients of condom failure rates. They also require the government to give equal opportunity to funding applicants that have “a religious or moral objection” to a particular AIDS prevention method or treatment program, such as condoms or needle exchanges.