The practice of “judge shopping” in the US is facing renewed scrutiny after a judge suspended the use of the abortion pill in a case with national repercussions. Plaintiffs in the US have always tried to choose a court that would give them an advantage when entering the legal system, where a case can end up on any judge’s desk.
This practice has escalated to the point where it is now possible to go to a court that only has one judge whose positions are well known, which is causing concerns. While plaintiffs can choose the court, they are not supposed to be able to choose a judge, particularly at the federal level. In some places, however, such as the state of Texas, the geography has allowed for interesting possibilities. “There are many remote places in Texas where there is only one federal judge to handle all the demand,” says Joshua Blackman, a professor of constitutional law at the South Texas College of Law.
That is the case in Amarillo, a city on the edge of Texas, where the only federal judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk, was appointed by former President Donald Trump. Kacsmaryk has a history and has received ultra-conservative training in his work as a lawyer for Christian organizations. Opponents of abortion strategically founded a new association in Amarillo, called the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, and three months later filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of the abortion pill mifepristone, confident that it would end up on Kacsmaryk’s desk.
On Friday, the judge ruled in favor of the association, as expected, making a decision that could effectively suspend authorization to use the medication starting on April 15th.