Two Supreme Court justices testified before Congress on Tuesday to defend a $228 million budget request designed to shield them and their families from an escalating wave of threats. The rare Capitol appearance by Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett marked the first time sitting justices had testified in seven years, and they delivered stark warnings about the danger they now face.
Justice Kagan told lawmakers that "threats have come very close" to the justices in recent years. Justice Barrett spoke in deeply personal terms about the toll the security measures have taken, describing how her son has witnessed her bringing home a bulletproof vest. The emotional testimony underscored why the court is now seeking resources to expand its police force, hire cybersecurity engineers, and construct a visitor screening facility outside the courthouse.
The numbers driving the request are alarming. The U.S. Marshals Service documented over 600 threats against federal judges in fiscal year 2023. This year, threats against the Supreme Court alone have jumped 38 percent, following a 25 percent increase the year before. The court's police estimate these figures will continue climbing.
The House hearing proceeded in unusually collegial fashion, with members from both parties asking pointed but respectful questions. Representative Steny Hoyer, the top Democrat on the panel, told the justices that Congress understood the stakes and would provide necessary funding to protect all judicial personnel.
Beyond security, lawmakers pressed the justices on ethics and financial disclosure rules. The topic has festered since Justice Clarence Thomas failed to report years of luxury travel and expensive gifts from a wealthy donor. Justice Kagan expressed support for an enforcement mechanism to oversee the court's ethics code, suggesting a committee of respected judges could do the job. Justice Barrett, however, voiced concerns about the "complexities" of creating such a system, particularly one that could oversee the nation's highest court.
The justices also fielded questions about the court's emergency docket, which issues rushed decisions with minimal explanation. Justice Kagan acknowledged her past criticism of the practice but told the committee she no longer considers it a major problem, noting that the court has improved its practice of offering reasoning for those orders. Justice Barrett agreed there has been "a big change" in how the docket operates.
When asked about the 2022 leak of the draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, both justices said the source has never been identified. Barrett and Kagan said such leaks frustrate the court but offered no details on any ongoing investigation.
The justices described the personal adjustment to constant security. "It's easier living life without security than it is living life with security," Kagan said. Each justice now travels with a security detail of four to eight law enforcement officers. The court wants to expand those numbers as part of its budget request.
The proposed $6.5 million screening facility outside the courthouse represents a modest escalation of security measures. It echoes the 2010 decision to close the Supreme Court's iconic front entrance to the public. That move, driven by security concerns, prompted an unusual dissenting statement from then-Justice Stephen Breyer, who noted that no other supreme court in the world, even those facing greater threats like Israel's, had closed its main entrance.
Security funding for the Supreme Court has grown dramatically in recent years. Over the past decade, the court's budget has risen 136 percent, far outpacing the 37 percent increase for the rest of the judiciary, according to the Congressional Research Service. Lower-court judges, who depend on a separate funding stream, have complained about insufficient resources even as they face their own rising threats.
The justices were scheduled to testify again before a Senate committee later that afternoon, continuing their unusual foray into the legislative arena to defend their institution's needs.
Author Sarah Mitchell: "Two justices breaking seven years of silence to plead for security funding shows how real the threat has become, but the real test will be whether Congress actually delivers the money or treats it as another budget line item to negotiate."
Comments