Texas has filed litigation against the Biden administration, and the Justice Department is stepping up its accusations that the state is judge-shopping in these proceedings.
The Lone Star State’s practice of filing cases in a way that enables it to effectively select the judges who hear them is giving the department trouble as it tries to push back against it.
The judge appeared to ignore DOJ’s objections and to blame the administration for any notion that the case assignment set up was unfair at a hearing last week on a Justice Department request that one such case—a challenge to a Biden immigration policy—be transferred to another federal court.
The judge, US District Judge Drew Tipton, is one of three judges presiding over cases where the DOJ has criticized Texas for sending its litigation against the Biden administration to courthouses – frequently in remote parts of the state where a single, predetermined judge is assigned to most or all of the cases.
The DOJ claimed in a brief it sent to Tipton this week that Texas may get around the random assignment system by using its strategies and never filing in Divisions where there is a non-trivial possibility they won’t know what judge they will likely be given.
Private litigants have also been accused of abusing the system; arguably the most well-known instance was a lawsuit filed by pro-lifers to stop the FDA from approving a medication abortion drug. Medication abortions are the most popular way to end a pregnancy.
Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointment who has previously rendered contentious decisions against the Biden administration, is currently hearing the case. Kacsmaryk is almost certain to hear cases filed in the Amarillo division, where the medication abortion lawsuit was originally filed.
READ ALSO: Superintendent David Brown Supposed To Resign & Move Back To Texas
Texas AG Ken Paxton Often Sues Biden Administration
In the state’s smaller cities like Lubbock, Amarillo, and Victoria, where municipal orders assign the majority of cases to a Trump-appointed judge, Paxton has frequently fought the Biden administration.
According to the department’s petition on Monday, Paxton has been able to achieve this by holding that a state is considered to be present for venue purposes not just in its state capital but also in every district or division throughout its territory.
The Justice Department contended that was incorrect and that if a submission with strong indications of judge shopping were allowed unchecked, “the public’s interest in the impartial administration of justice would be injured.”
Paxton claimed in a lawsuit filed on February 15 that the $1.7 trillion fiscal 2023 spending package passed in December violated the constitution because more than half of the Democratic-led US House of Representatives members were absent when a quorum was needed and instead cast their votes by proxy in accordance with pandemic-era regulations.
When the Republicans seized control of the House in January, the proxy voting procedure was abolished. The action on Monday comes in response to demands from the Justice Department to move two other Paxton-led cases before judges who have been chosen by Trump, starting with the case against a Biden immigration policy, which is currently before US District Judge Drew Tipton in Victoria.
The second case, which is in front of US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Amarillo, seeks to overturn a Biden administration regulation that permits retirement plans to take environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) concerns into account when making investment decisions.
READ ALSO: Reason For Dallas Crimes Going Down, Chief Defines The Science
