Press Alleges Judge is Dodging Coverage in Texas Abortion Pill Case

A federal court in Northern Texas could revoke the FDA approval of an abortion medication, which would alter abortion policy across the country.

AP/David Erickson
Protesters in support of access to abortion medication outside the Federal Courthouse on March 15, 2023 at Amarillo, Texas. AP/David Erickson

A ruling could come at any moment in a Texas case that could take a widely used abortion medication off the market nationwide, even in states where abortion remains legal.

The Texas lawsuit concerns the FDA approval of mifepristone, which has been used in America since 2000 and has been used in other countries, such as France, since the 1980s. 

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the Northern District of Texas, who is known for his anti-abortion beliefs, could rule on the issue at any point. 

Judge Kacsmaryk has also faced criticism from the News Media Coalition for alleged efforts to prevent coverage and protest at Wednesday’s hearing.

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. U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk is holding a hearing in a case that could throw into jeopardy access to the nation's most common method of abortion. He is a former attorney for a Christian legal group who critics say is being sought out by conservative litigants because they believe he'll be sympathetic to their causes.
Senate Judiciary Committee via AP

The group said in a court filing that the judge intentionally delayed entering Wednesday’s hearing into the public schedule to “limit the ability of members of the public, including the press” to attend the hearing.

In a filing Monday, the organization called on the court to “immediately docket the hearing scheduled for Wednesday” and to “rescind any request made to parties and their counsel not to discuss the hearing schedule in this case publicly.”

“Across the ideological spectrum, the public is intensely interested in this case,” attorney Peter Steffensen wrote on the organization’s behalf. “The Court cannot constitutionally close the courtroom indirectly when it cannot constitutionally close the courtroom directly.”

Following Monday’s complaint, Judge Kacsmaryk ordered the court to officially schedule Wednesday’s meeting, which took place at Amarillo, Texas.

This case has drawn significant attention because Judge Kacsmaryk has been historically vocal about his personal opposition to abortion and his ruling will not even have an affect on the Northern District of Texas due to Texas’s ban on abortions.

After Roe v. Wade was overturned last summer, the conservative Christian legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom brought the case in November, alleging that the drug, which has been used for decades, was unsafe.

If Judge Kacsmaryk were to rule in favor of revoking the drug’s FDA approval, then the drug would become unavailable nationwide, regardless of state law.

The executive director of the Women’s March, Rachel Carmona, said that the case was not about the safety of the drug but rather an attempt to limit access to abortion care nationwide.

“This isn’t about what the overwhelming majority of Americans want; it’s about a small group of people who want control over women’s freedom to choose,” Ms. Carmona said.

The Alliance Defending Freedom contends that the FDA has “completely failed its statutory duties to protect women and girls,” according to their senior counsel, Julie Blake.

The issue also spurred action from a group of Democratic-led state governments, which brought a competing case in the Eastern District of Washington.

Nevada, Delaware, Arizona, Illinois, Connecticut, Colorado, Vermont, New Mexico, Michigan, and Rhode Island joined Washington in a complaint alleging that the FDA is restricting mifepristone unduly. 

The Washington attorney general, Bob Ferguson, said that the “FDA’s excessive restrictions on this important drug have no basis in medical science.”

The case in Washington, which will likely be resolved after the case in Texas, could create a conflicting ruling to the case in Texas, which would require a resolution from a higher court, like the Supreme Court.


The New York Sun

© 2025 The New York Sun Company, LLC. All rights reserved.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. The material on this site is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used.

The New York Sun

Sign in or  Create a free account

or
By continuing you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use