Main: In this image from video from the Senate Judiciary Committee, Matthew Kacsmaryk listens during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, on Dec. 13, 2017 (Senate Judiciary Committee via AP). Inset: Mifepristone tablets are seen in a Planned Parenthood clinic Thursday, July 18, 2024, in Ames, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall, File).
The Donald Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas who unilaterally ordered the FDA to revoke approval of a widely used abortion drug has now allowed Idaho, Kansas and Missouri to move forward with their own attempts to limit access to the drug. The ruling comes after the original plaintiffs to the case dismissed their complaint — and despite the fact that none of the three new plaintiff states include Texas, where the case is proceeding.
U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk is the only federal judge sitting in the Northern District of Texas — which means cases filed in that district are sure to come before him. As widely expected, several anti-abortion groups strategically filed cases in Amarillo and were rewarded with favorable rulings by Kacsmaryk.
The trio of states hostile to abortion want the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to prohibit telehealth prescriptions for the drug mifepristone, require that it be used only in the first seven weeks of pregnancy, and require in-person doctor visits to get the drug. Kacsmaryk’s ruling Thursday allowed the states to amend their complaint and intervene as plaintiffs.
In 2023, Kacsmaryk issued an unprecedented decision that ordered the FDA to revoke its decades-old approval of the drug.
Mifepristone is one part of a two-drug combination used in the U.S. for medication abortions. Misoprostol, the second drug used as part of the regimen, also has uses unrelated to the termination of pregnancy. In 2021, the FDA announced it would no longer force patients to appear in person to get a prescription for mifepristone after it reviewed safety data from pregnant women who used it during the COVID-19 pandemic. The policy was formalized in 2023, which then led to Kacsmaryk’s decision and ignited a national debate over judicial authority related to FDA approvals.
Kacsmaryk’s decision was unanimously overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court, but on narrow procedural grounds.
In the current case, Kacsmaryk allowed the red states’ amended claim to proceed. In their filing, they claimed that the FDA’s loosened restrictions on mifepristone allowed the pills to come across their state borders, endangering the lives of women and undermining their strict anti-abortion laws.
The states are challenging the FDA actions that have loosened restrictions on the drug since 2016, including approving it for use in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy and allowing it to be prescribed by telemedicine and sent through the mail.
The Biden administration moved to dismiss the case, but Kacsmaryk was unreceptive to the administration’s arguments. The essence of the government’s position rests on basic procedural grounds: the original plaintiffs in the lawsuit voluntarily dismissed their case in November, and therefore, there is no valid action in which Idaho, Kansas and Missouri can intervene.
The Trump appointee rejected that argument and said the intervenor states have a right to pursue their case before him in Texas.
In his four-page ruling, the judge wrote that the DOJ’s filings “deftly quote lines to seemingly further their position,” but that the legal precedents it relied upon were not “truly persuasive to their position.” On the issue of Amarillo, Texas as the venue for the case, Kacsmaryk said, “venue remains disputed here and should be properly dealt with at a phase where each party may fully argue the issue.”
The case will now proceed before Kacsmaryk as the trio of states attempts to make their case against FDA regulations.
You can read the full ruling here.
