On May 26, 2025, US President Donald Trump delivered a powerful speech at the Memorial Day wreath-laying ceremony at the Memorial Amphitheater in Arlington National Cemetery, Virginia. As he stood before the solemn rows of graves, he paid tribute to the brave men and women who have sacrificed their lives for the country. With his characteristic passion and conviction, President Trump reminded the nation of the importance of honoring and remembering those who have served.
But it was not just his words that captured the attention of the audience. It was also the presence of two of his nominees for lifetime federal judgeships, Joshua Divine and Maria Lanahan, who stood by his side. These two individuals have recently made headlines for their involvement in a major challenge to the abortion pill on behalf of Missouri.
Divine, currently the solicitor general of Missouri and director of special litigation in the state attorney general’s office, and Lanahan, the state’s principal deputy solicitor general, have been nominated by President Trump for federal judgeships in the Eastern and Western Districts of Missouri. Their nomination has sparked controversy and raised concerns about their stance on reproductive rights.
In October, Divine and Lanahan represented the state of Missouri in challenging the Food and Drug Administration’s regulations around mifepristone, the abortion pill. Their nearly 200-page complaint was filled with anti-abortion misinformation, including the false claim that the abortion pill “starves the baby to death in the womb.” They also argued that access to mifepristone leads to a “diminishment of political representation” and “loss of federal funds” for some red states.
Their involvement in this case has raised questions about their ability to rule impartially and protect the rights of all Americans. Caroline Ciccone, president of Accountable.US, a government watchdog group, stated that Divine and Lanahan’s record of “eliminating Americans’ freedoms” is out of step with the majority of the public and calls into question their suitability for the role of federal judges.
Ciccone also warned that a vote for these judicial nominees is a “rubber stamp” for President Trump’s ideological judicial agenda. She urged senators to carefully consider the implications of confirming these nominees and the potential impact on reproductive rights.
Divine and Lanahan’s involvement in the case State of Missouri v. US Food and Drug Administration, alongside several other lawyers representing the attorney general offices of Kansas and Idaho, has also raised concerns about their use of discredited anti-abortion junk science. The suit, which is an amended complaint to FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, was revived by the state attorneys general despite the Supreme Court rejecting the previous plaintiffs on a lack of legal standing.
The amended complaint, co-authored by Divine and Lanahan, makes outlandish claims such as the argument that mifepristone is dangerous and that more regulations around the drug are needed. They also argue for a ban on telehealth medicine for abortion care. The suit also makes bizarre claims, including that abortion pills by mail should be banned because one study showed that access to mifepristone via telehealth has lowered the birth rates for teen mothers. Another claim in the complaint is that the sight of blood in a toilet after taking the abortion pill can cause post-traumatic stress disorder in women.
This amended complaint is a clear attempt at “judge shopping,” a strategy used by conservatives to get their cases before judges who share their views. Missouri, Idaho, and Kansas filed the complaint in the Northern District of Texas, which has become known for this controversial practice. Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a far-right Trump appointee infamous for his anti-abortion views, is the only judge in the district who ruled last year that the FDA unlawfully approved mifepristone when it first went to market over two decades ago.
The Trump administration has asked Kacsmaryk to dismiss the lawsuit, citing that the states have no standing to sue. While this may be a strategic move by the Department of Justice, it also reveals the blatant attempt at judge shopping by the states involved.
Katie O’Connor, senior director of federal abortion policy at the National Women’s Law Center, expressed concern about the impact of these judicial nominees on reproductive rights. She stated that the administration’s choice of nominees is a clear indication of their agenda to further restrict abortion access. O’Connor warned that this could have serious consequences for the next three and a half years.
President Trump’s nomination of
