WASHINGTON — Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Gins­burg has com­pleted ra­di­a­tion ther­apy for a can­cer­ous tu­mor on her pan­creas and there is no ev­i­dence of the dis­ease re­main­ing, the court said Fri­day.

It is the fourth time that the 86-year-old justice has an­nounced that she has been treated for can­cer over the last two de­cades and fol­lows lung can­cer sur­gery in Decem­ber that kept her away from the court for weeks.

Decem­ber’s sur­gery was her first ill­ness-re­lated ab­sence from the court since be­ing ap­pointed by Pres­i­dent Bill Clin­ton in 1993 and prompted even closer at­ten­tion to her health.

As the court’s old­est mem­ber, Justice Gins­burg has been asked ques­tions for years about her health and re­tire­ment plans.

She also has at­tracted en­thu­si­as­tic fans in re­cent years as the leader of the lib­eral wing of the court, which in­cludes four mem­bers ap­pointed by Dem­o­crats and five by Re­pub­li­cans.

The court kept Justice Gins­burg’s lat­est can­cer se­cret for three weeks, un­til she fin­ished ra­di­a­tion treat­ment.

There is no ob­li­ga­tion for justices to dis­close de­tails about their health, and Justice Gins­burg has gen­er­ally made more in­for­ma­tion avail­able than some of her col­leagues.

Re­tired Justice An­thony Ken­nedy, for ex­am­ple, had a stent in­serted to open a blocked ar­tery in 2005 but the pub­lic only learned about it 10 months later when he re­turned to the hos­pi­tal to have it re­placed.

The Supreme Court in­di­cated Fri­day that a rou­tine blood test led to the de­tec­tion of Justice Gins­burg’s tu­mor.

A bi­opsy per­formed July 31 con­firmed a “lo­cal­ized ma­lig­nant tu­mor,” and Justice Gins­burg started out­pa­tient ra­di­a­tion ther­apy Aug. 5.

She un­der­went three weeks of ra­di­a­tion ther­apy and as part of her treat­ment had a bile duct stent placed, the court said. Justice Gins­burg “tol­er­ated treat­ment well” and does not need any ad­di­tional treat­ment but will con­tinue to have pe­ri­odic blood tests and scans, the state­ment said.

The tu­mor was “treated de­fin­i­tively and there is no ev­i­dence of dis­ease else­where in the body,” the court said.

The state­ment did not say if the new tu­mor is a re­cur­rence of the pan­cre­atic can­cer Justice Gins­burg was di­ag­nosed with in 2009, or a new can­cer that arose.

She was treated for col­orec­tal can­cer in 1999.

“It’s cer­tainly not un­heard of for the can­cer to come back,” but it’s a more dire sit­u­a­tion if it’s that rather than a new tu­mor that was found early enough for ef­fec­tive treat­ment, said Dr. Mi­chael Pish­va­ian, a pan­cre­atic spe­cial­ist at the Univer­sity of Texas MD Ander­son Cancer Center who had no first-hand knowl­edge of Justice Gins­burg’s care.

Pan­cre­atic tu­mors are usu­ally treated with sur­gery, but she or her doc­tors may have

cho­sen not to do that for var­i­ous rea­sons, and ra­di­a­tion is a stan­dard treat­ment if sur­gery is not done, Dr. Pish­va­ian said.

Dr. Alan Ve­nook, a Univer­sity of Cal­i­for­nia, San Fran­cisco, pan­cre­atic can­cer spe­cial­ist who also has no di­rect knowl­edge of Justice Gins­burg’s case, said it’s not pos­si­ble to know much about her out­look with­out de­tails from her doc­tors.

If it is a re­cur­rence that took a de­cade to form, “that tells me it’s not a very ag­gres­sive can­cer,” he said.

The court said Justice Gins­burg can­celed an an­nual sum­mer visit to Santa Fe but oth­er­wise main­tained an ac­tive sched­ule dur­ing treat­ment. She is sched­uled to speak in Buf­falo next week and at the Li­brary of Con­gress Na­tional Book Fes­ti­val in Wash­ing­ton at the end of the month.

Be­fore Fri­day’s an­nounce­ment, Justice Gins­burg’s most re­cent known health scare was in Decem­ber, when she had sur­gery for lung can­cer.

The can­cer­ous growths were found when she un­der­went med­i­cal tests af­ter she fell in her court of­fice and broke three ribs in No­vem­ber.

Justice Gins­burg was ab­sent from the court in Jan­u­ary as she re­cov­ered from sur­gery and missed six days on which the court heard a to­tal of 11 ar­gu­ments. But she re­turned to the bench in Feb­ru­ary and par­tic­i­pated in the court’s work dur­ing her ab­sence.

SALT LAKE CITY — A new U.S. gov­ern­ment man­age­ment plan un­veiled Fri­day clears the way for coal min­ing and oil and gas drill­ing on land that used to be off lim­its as part of a sprawl­ing na­tional mon­u­ment in Utah be­fore Pres­i­dent Trump down­sized the pro­tected area two years ago.

The Bureau of Land Man­age­ment plan also would open more lands to cat­tle graz­ing and rec­re­ation and ac­knowl­edges there could be “ad­verse ef­fects” on land and re­sources in the mon­u­ment.

While al­low­ing more ac­tiv­i­ties, the plan also would add a few safe­guards for the cliffs, can­yons, wa­ter­falls, and arches still in­side Grand Stair­case-Es­ca­lante Na­tional Mon­u­ment that weren’t in a pro­posed plan is­sued last year.

Among them are open­ing fewer acres to ATVs and can­cel­ing a plan that would have al­lowed peo­ple to col­lect some non-di­no­saur fos­sils.

The Bureau of Land Man­age­ment said no land will be sold from the 1,345 square miles that were cut from what had been the 3,000 square miles of the mon­u­ment.

Harry Bar­ber, act­ing man­ager of the na­tional mon­u­ment, said the plan re­flects changes made af­ter con­sid­er­ing in­put from the pub­lic and con­sid­er­ing an as­sess­ment that there are enough pro­tec­tions al­ready in place.

“There are peo­ple who graze live­stock, peo­ple that like to hunt, peo­ple that like to hike, peo­ple that like to trail run,” said Mr. Bar­ber, who has worked at the mon­u­ment since it was cre­ated. “We’re try­ing to be fair.”

The plan is ex­pected to go into ef­fect af­ter a pub­lic re­view.

The mon­u­ment has had a 63 per­cent in­crease in vis­i­tors over the past de­cade, host­ing 1.1 mil­lion peo­ple from Oc­to­ber, 2017, through Sep­tem­ber, 2018, ac­cord­ing to U.S. gov­ern­ment fig­ures.

Con­ser­va­tion and pa­le­on­tol­ogy groups have filed law­suits to stop the down­siz­ing.

They say the new plan lacks ade­quate pro­tec­tions for the land and re­it­er­ated their con­cern that the years spent cre­at­ing the plan were a waste of tax­payer re­sources be­cause the law­suits re­main un­re­solved.

Steve Bloch, le­gal di­rec­tor at the South­ern Utah Wil­der­ness Al­liance con­ser­va­tion group, said it’s un­for­giv­able to cut the mon­u­ment in half and down­grade the ex­cluded lands to what he calls “gar­den va­ri­ety pub­lic lands.”

“Grand Stair­case-Es­ca­lante is one of the na­tion’s pub­lic land crown jew­els and from the out­set the Trump Ad­min­is­tra­tion was hell-bent on de­stroy­ing this place,” he said.

The al­low­ance for coal, oil, and gas ex­trac­tion on the lands cut was ex­pected as the Trump Ad­min­is­tra­tion car­ried out a “reck­less” plan to undo pro­tec­tions on pris­tine lands, said Heidi McIn­tosh, man­ag­ing at­tor­ney of Earth­justice’s Rocky Moun­tains of­fice.

“First, they ripped in half and now they are of­fi­cially open­ing the door to all kinds of de­struc­tive ac­tiv­i­ties,” she said. “It’s re­ally a give­away to the fos­sil fuel in­dus­try.”

Mr. Bar­ber said that pro­tec­tions will re­main even though the lands are no lon­ger within the mon­u­ment.

“It’s not a free-for-all,” he