Fix the Court’s Gabe Roth has sent the letter below to every Hill office to ensure that threats to judges are receiving the attention from lawmakers they deserve.

As background, in the aftermath of Jan. 6 and a George Floyd-related protest that damaged a courthouse, Congress approved a whopping $112.5 million supplemental in 2022 to “harden” courthouses. That same year, Congress approved more money for SCOTUS security after the Kavanaugh assassination attempt.

Yet here we are today with skyrocketing threats against lower court judges, and the Court Security  account for the U.S. Marshals Service remains tens of millions of dollars below where it needs to be.

The AO is asking for a $142 million increase for it for next fiscal year, but (a) they may not get it, and (b) we can’t wait the five months until FY26 begins given the heightened threat environment, so we need a supplemental now — and we need to keep the pressure on.

——————-

Good morning,

My name is Gabe Roth, and I am executive director of Fix the Court. Though my organization’s primary focus is increasing openness and accountability in the federal judiciary, a platform that we believe will strengthen the branch, we have long been concerned about gaps in judicial security.[1] Judges and justices must be able to perform their functions without undue concern they’ll be put in harm’s way. Maintaining the rule of law requires as much.

In recent years, amid a heightened threat environment, Congress has at times stepped up to ensure the judiciary has the resources it needs to protect judicial officers. When, after the leak of the Dobbs draft opinion in 2022, threats to the justices increased, Republicans and Democrats came together to pass legislation to give the Supreme Court Police the authority to protect members of the justices’ families. Weeks later, a bipartisan effort to increase SCOTUS security funding — $10.3 million for the U.S. Marshals Service and $9.1 million for the Supreme Court Police Department — was added to the CHIPS Act. And late last year, $25.6 million, split between USMS and SCPD, was included in a funding bill to cover expenses for protecting the justices’ homes.

In 2025, the judiciary again faces intense security challenges. Several dozen judges have been threatened of late over social media or by having pizzas sent to their houses to indicate that malign actors know where they live. Last month, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts reported that “67 judges are receiving enhanced online security screening services provided […] due to the judges’ involvement in high-profile cases,” with USMS in some cases having to take “extraordinary measures” to ensure their safety.

Unfortunately, funding levels for judicial security haven’t matched this amplified level of concern. Last year, the judiciary asked that the USMS’s Court Security account be funded at $797 million for FY25; instead, it remained at the 2023 level, or $750.2 million. For FY26, the branch requested $892 million for security, a 19 percent increase. (A hearing on the judiciary’s budget is scheduled in House Appropriations on May 14.)

I am hopeful that Congress funds the full amount of the third branch’s request. But I also don’t believe we can wait until October for that additional funding to kick in, which is why I believe the U.S. Marshals’ Court Security account is in dire need of a supplemental spending bill today.

This is not a Republican or Democratic or even Appropriations Member issue: it’s an issue that every elected official should be working on.

A supplemental of, say, $50 million, would provide critical protection to judicial officers at a time of great need. The USMS is exempt from the federal hiring freeze, so the first order of business would be to hire and train more deputy U.S. Marshals across several assignments, including the justices’ security details and any ongoing threat-based protective details (i.e., 24/7 protection of lower court judges who need it). That funding could help DUSMs investigate increased threats directed at judges and courthouses, assist in the removal of judges’ home addresses and other sensitive personally identifiable information from the Internet under the Anderl Act and coordinate with state and local law enforcement to mitigate threats. Funds could also be used in support of the new Judicial Security and Independence Task Force. Plus, we’re just weeks away from annual conferences in the Second, Fourth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth and Tenth Circuits, and additional USMS funding could be leveraged to host security trainings at those events.

A supplemental would also permit greater flexibility, as we don’t know at this moment where the next threat or round of threats might come from or where additional security resources would need to be deployed.

Finally, it’s worth noting that this wouldn’t be the first time in recent memory where the judiciary was appropriated security funding off-cycle. Following protests at federal courthouses that caused millions in damage, and as part of the Continuing Appropriations and Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act that President Biden signed in 2022, the branch received $112.5 million over three years for the hardening of courthouse security. (That funding, obligated over three years, will dry up shortly.)

The bottom line is that the threats against judges aren’t going away — they’ll only get worse, if anything — and the brave men and women who protect our nine Supreme Court justices and our 2,300 lower court federal judges desperately need reinforcements. I hope you consider this proposal.

Sincerely,
Gabe Roth
Fix the Court

Example of programs and assignments that could be funded via security supplemental:

I. U.S. Marshals Service personnel
— Increased funding to hire and train deputy U.S. Marshals (DUSMs) for increased protective duty for Supreme Court justices and their homes/families, or to ensure more senior DUSMs take the assignment (currently, some DUSMs straight out of training are being assigned to SCOTUS’s residential detail)
— Increased funding to hire and train new DUSMs to staff threat-based protective details (i.e., 24/7 coverage when needed) of lower court judges given the heightened threat environment
— Increased funding to hire and train new DUSMs in the Office of Protective Intelligence to expand USMS’s capability to investigate threats and inappropriate communications directed at judges and courthouses

II. Program funds
— Enhancement of the USMS program charged with removing personally identifiable information from the Internet under the Anderl Act, i.e., a combination of more staff hires and more outreach to judges who have yet to sign up with one of the vendors (such as IronWall and DeleteMe) since the program is opt-in
— Enhanced coordination between the Judicial Security Division’s Judicial Threat Operations Center (p. 27) and state and local law enforcement on new threats to judges, including home pizza deliveries
— Funding to support the new Judicial Security and Independence Task Force

III. Home intrusion detection systems (HIDS) improvements
— Audit of the current HIDS system to encourage 100% participation (Sept. 2024 rate was 72%) — e.g., identity all the judges who aren’t participating, conduct interviews with a certain percentage of them and based on that develop materials to encourage signups
— Funding to cover the anticipated additional sign-ups to HIDS

IV. Training
— Funding to work with the Federal Judicial Center to develop new training programs for judges on how they can better keep themselves and their families safe
— Funding to send DUSMs to each circuit’s annual conference to conduct in-person training (for the conferences that have biennial conferences or already had theirs this year, trainings could be conducted remotely)

———

[1] See, e.g., this 2019 Fix the Court letter to House Appropriations requesting that it fund 24/7 protection for the justices.