MV TELEGRAPH

Abortion rights supporters gather in front of the J Marvin Jones Federal Building and Courthouse on March 15, 2023 in Amarillo, Texas.

Moises Avila | AFP | Getty Images

Democrats on the US House Energy and Commerce Committee on Wednesday called for an immediate hearing on a federal judge’s order to suspend the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone.

All 23 Democrats on the committee wrote in a letter to Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., arguing that the ruling undermines the FDA’s authority over the drug approval process.

Lawmakers said the committee and the public needed to hear from experts about the implications of Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s decision last week. They cite more than a dozen food and drug law scientists who say that banning mifepristone would produce “harmful after-effects” that would affect abortion patients, healthcare providers and the biopharmaceutical industry.

“The committee and the American people need to understand the implications of this decision and what is at stake not only for abortion care but for access to critical, safe and effective medicines more broadly,” they wrote in the letter.

Mifepristone, used in combination with another drug called misoprostol, is the most common method of terminating a pregnancy in the United States, accounting for about half of all abortions, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The letter comes a day after Republican and Democratic lawmakers fell out over Kacsmaryk’s order. which he presented last Friday before the US District Court in Amarillo, Texas.

More than 200 Democratic lawmakers filed an amicus brief on Tuesday asking a federal appeals court to grant emergency relief from the ruling. Fifty senators and 190 members of the House of Representatives wrote in the brief that repealing the order “is necessary to mitigate the imminent harm to the public.”

Lawmakers added that many people rely on the availability of mifepristone for reproductive care, and “many more” rely on the FDA’s drug approval authority for access to other life-saving drugs.

Hours later, 69 Republicans filed a separate amicus brief asking the appeals court to uphold Kacsmaryk’s decision.

In their brief, GOP lawmakers said the agency’s approval of medical abortions was “unlawful.” They claimed the FDA failed to follow Congress’ “legally required drug approval process” by approving mifepristone in 2000.

“FDA’s lawless actions ultimately endanger women and girls who seek chemical abortions,” lawmakers wrote. The assignment was chaired by Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Miss., and includes 10 other senators and 58 House Republicans.

The briefs came a day after the Justice Department ordered the US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to keep the abortion pill mifepristone on the US market during the litigation, blocking the verdict until noon Thursday.

In his decision, Kacsmaryk said the FDA unreasonably rushed its approval process for mifepristone when it approved the drug.

The judge delayed the effective date of his ruling by a week to give the Biden administration time to appeal. It is scheduled to go into effect at 00:00 CT on Saturday.

Kacsmaryk’s decision conflicts with a ruling by a second federal judge. Minutes after the Texas decision, a Washington state judge issued an injunction that could protect access to mifepristone in the 17 states and Washington, DC, prompting a lawsuit arguing that there were too many regulations for the give medicine.

The two orders could potentially escalate the matter to the Supreme Court.

A pivotal dispute over the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone has sparked new allegations of “judge shopping” by plaintiffs seeking a favorable audience for their litigation.

Much of the abortion pill litigation has taken place in Amarillo, Texas, which has a federal division with only one district judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk.

Appointed to the Federal Bank in 2019 by former President Donald Trump, this judge previously worked for the conservative Christian rights group First Liberty Institute and represented socially conservative views on LGBTQ rights and abortion.

By filing the lawsuit in Amarillo, the cadre of anti-abortion groups seeking to nullify the FDA’s more than two-decade approval of the drug virtually guaranteed that Kacsmaryk would hear their case. Critics have accused the plaintiffs of targeting Kacsmaryk as chair of the case because he was seen as more sympathetic to their arguments that the drug had major safety concerns.

“We can’t always predict that judges will act according to their biographies,” Mary Ziegler, a law professor at the University of California, Davis, told CNBC.

But “if you’re the Alliance Defending Freedom” — the rights group representing some of the plaintiffs — “you’re going to want someone like this [Kacsmaryk] because your chances will be better,” she said.

The Amarillo court did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

The strategy of targeting one-judge sections harms perceptions of judicial fairness, critics say. They argue that plaintiffs are bypassing the usual process of randomly assigning cases — which is designed primarily to “avoid judge shopping,” according to a federal court.

Kacsmaryk on Friday suspended mifepristone approval, giving the Biden administration time to appeal. On the same day, another federal judge ordered the FDA not to restrict the pill’s availability in 17 states, essentially contradicting the Texas judge’s decision. The matter could go all the way to the US Supreme Court, which has a Conservative majority of 6-3.

A ruling on the legal status of the pill will have massive ramifications across the country, including in states that allow abortion following the court’s decision in Roe v. Repeal Wade last year remains legal. Medical abortion is the most common form of surgery in the United States

A lawyer for the ADF has rejected allegations of judge purchasing.

“We’re very confident that any judge who looks at FDA regulations and what the FDA actually did will rule for us,” Denise Harle, senior counsel for the ADF, told Fox News in February. “That’s what we’re looking for, just a fair trial, a fair opportunity to make our case in court.”

Harle also told Fox that the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a group of anti-abortion doctors represented by the ADF, is based in Amarillo.

But the Kacsmaryk courthouse has reportedly become a prime target for conservative legal affairs. The judge has repeatedly sided with the challenges of the Biden administration’s policies.

Other judges have made similar allegations. Trump was accused of shopping for judges in Florida for his nominated federal judge Aileen Cannon when he filed a sweeping lawsuit against his former political rival Hillary Clinton in Cannon’s Florida division in 2022.

That case was instead assigned to Judge Donald Middlebrooks, an appointee of ex-President Bill Clinton. Middlebrooks dismissed it.

But Cannon months later was randomly assigned to another Trump trial in which a judge was asked to appoint a “special master” to review government documents the FBI obtained in an August 2022 raid on the resort town of Mar-a- Lago had confiscated the ex-president. Cannon granted Trump’s request, surprising some legal experts at the time.

It is not new for litigants to seek to have their cases heard in the most favorable environment. The strategy is also nonpartisan: Ziegler noted that a challenge to then-President Trump’s controversial travel ban in Hawaii was filed in 2017.

This form of forum shopping is “always a kind of imperfect substitute” for those who are looking for a sympathetic judge, said Ziegler. She found that there are progressive judges in conservative states and vice versa.

However, by filing a complaint in a chamber with a single judge, it is easier for a plaintiff to target a specific judge.

Constitutional law expert Steve Vladeck wrote in February: “Of the 27 divisions of Texas’ four circuit courts, nine have a single judge; ten others have only two.”

In a separate case brought before Kacsmaryk this year, the Justice Department requested a transfer to another federal court, arguing that the decision to place the Amarillo court “undermine public confidence in the administration of justice” because the court “has no connection to this dispute.” Kacsmaryk refused this request.

Another DOJ letter in February singled out Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and accused the Republican official of filing 18 of his 28 lawsuits against the Biden administration in one-judge divisions. Paxton’s office has defended its decisions on where to file its cases, telling CNN last month that the Biden administration’s allegations risk “undermining public confidence in the legal system.”

Ziegler shared the view that even the appearance of judge purchases can erode trust in the courts.

“When the public knows that you can order an outcome by picking a judge, it becomes really difficult to convince the public that the courts are legitimate,” she said.

Assistant Attorney for First Liberty Institute Matthew Kacsmaryk answers questions during his nomination hearing by the US Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington, DC, December 13, 2017, in a still from video.

Reuters

Attorneys general of nearly half of U.S. states warn in a new court filing that a federal judge’s decision to suspend the 23-year-old Food and Drug Administration approval of mifepristone across the country “poses devastating risks to millions of people.” including those in states where abortion remains legal.

Attorneys general, in their filing filed Monday, asked the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to keep mifepristone on the market while a legal battle over the legality of the abortion pill unfolded.

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the US District Court in Amarillo, Texas, effectively revoked the FDA approval of mifepristone on Friday.

But he put his decision on hold for a week to give the Biden administration time to appeal.

Kacsmaryk’s decision will go into effect at 12:00 a.m. CT Saturday if the 5th Circuit does not stop it.

In their filing Monday, the Attorneys General for 23 states and the District of Columbia condemned Kacsmaryk’s ruling as “legally flawed” and warned it would undermine the FDA’s approval process.

Attorneys general argued that Kacsmaryk’s order violated “states’ sovereign decisions” to protect access to abortion following last summer’s Supreme Court decision, Roe v federal constitutional rights to abortion.

Mifepristone, used in combination with another drug, misoprostol, is the most common method of terminating a pregnancy in the United States, accounting for about half of all abortions.

The Attorneys General cited this fact in their brief.

“Since medical abortion is the most common method used to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester, limiting access to this method will result in more abortions occurring later in pregnancy, further increasing costs and medical risks,” wrote the Attorney General.

The Justice Department on Monday asked the 5th Circuit to rule on its request to halt Kacsmaryk’s decision by Thursday noon “to allow the government to seek redress from the Supreme Court if necessary.”

Danco Laboratories, the distributor of mifepristone, has also asked the Court of Appeals to stay Kacsmaryk’s decision for at least 14 days to allow the company to “seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court.”

CNBC Health & Science

Read CNBC’s latest global health coverage:

There is significant uncertainty as to how Kacsmaryk’s decision will affect the legality of mifepristone unless his decision is blocked by the 5th Circuit Court or the Supreme Court.

Just 20 minutes after Kacsymaryk issued his ruling Friday, another federal judge, Thomas Rice of the Eastern District of Washington, barred the FDA from “the status quo and rights regarding the availability of mifepristone” in the District of Columbia and 17 to change states that had sued to keep the drug on the market in their jurisdictions.

The Justice Department has asked Rice to clarify how the FDA should respond to its decision if Kacsmaryk’s decision goes into effect, noting that Washington State’s decision appears to have “significant tension” with Kacsmaryk’s decision.

The DOJ requested Rice to respond to that request by Friday.

Kacsmaryk’s decision does not affect the availability of misoprostol, which the World Health Organization recommends as a standalone abortion drug.

States like California are stockpiling misoprostol in case Kacsmaryk’s decision goes into effect.

In addition to the District of Columbia, the states that submitted Monday’s brief to the 5th Circuit are Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey and New Mexico , New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.