Judge in abortion pill case set hearing but sought to delay public announcement

Stating he wants a safe and orderly proceeding, Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk asked attorneys not to disclose the hearing and planned to add it on the public record only the evening before.

The federal judge in a closely watched lawsuit seeking to overturn federal approval of a widely used abortion pill has scheduled the first hearing of the case this week, but he planned to delay public outreach, according to people familiar with the matter.

Northern District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk of Texas, told attorneys in the case on Friday that he was planning the hearing for Wednesday morning. However, he asked them not to release this information and said he would not enter it into the court's public record until Tuesday evening.

A familiar person with the case, which is being heard in federal court in Amarillo, Texas, said such action was "highly improper," especially for a matter of intense public interest.

Judge Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee who wrote critically about Roe v. Wade and who previously worked for a Christian conservative legal organization, told lawyers on a Friday conference call that he did not want the March 15 hearing to be "disrupted" and that he wanted all parties involved share according to people familiar with the discussion.

The judge also said court staff faced security issues, including death threats, and that the measure was intended to ensure the safety of legal proceedings.

The lawsuit, filed in November against the Food and Drug Administration by a coalition of anti-abortion groups and doctors, aims to end more than 20 years of legal use of abortion drugs. The plaintiffs, led by the Hippocratic Medicine Alliance, an organization that lists five anti-abortion groups among its members, asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction ordering the F.D.A. to withdraw its longstanding endorsement of mifepristone, the first pill in the two-drug medical abortion regimen.

At the hearing, attorneys representing plaintiffs , the F.D.A. and a manufacturer of mifepristone will present arguments for and against an injunction. It is unclear whether the judge will decide to issue an order that day or a little later.

Such an order would be unprecedented, say legal experts, and - if the higher courts were to allow an injunction to stand - would make it harder for patients to get abortions in states where abortion is legal, not just in those trying to restrict it.

Medical abortion is already used in more than half of abortions in the United States. This proportion has increased as conservative states impose abortion bans or sweeping restrictions following the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the nation's abortion rights last June.

The Washington Post reported earlier on Friday's appeal and the upcoming hearing.

Asking attorneys to remain silent On the hearing, the judge did not issue a gag order, which would prevent participants on the appeal from sharing information. He instead asked them to keep the information secret "as a courtesy".

He said the court would provide seats for the public and the press, but his plan providing little notice seemed likely to have the practical effect of minimizing the number of people who would be present, according to people familiar with the discussion. Amarillo in the Texas Panhandle is several hours away from other major cities in Texas, and only a few of these cities have direct flights.

Friday , the public court record showed subtle signs that something unusual had happened. That morning, the first new entry in 10 days was added to the case file: a notice to appear for a Department of Justice attorney, a standard document usually added to a case before an upcoming proceeding, but the file does not have .. .