Two Supreme Court justices made a rare joint appearance before Congress on Tuesday, pressing lawmakers to approve a significant budget increase to counter what they described as an alarming and persistent rise in threats targeting them and their families.
Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett—appointed by Democratic and Republican presidents respectively and often on opposing sides of ideologically charged rulings—testified before the House Appropriations subcommittee. It marked the first time a justice has publicly defended the court’s budget request since 2019, reflecting a growing sense of urgency around judicial security.
The high court is seeking more than $225 million for fiscal year 2027, a nearly $20 million increase from the current year. The request includes roughly $18 million for upkeep of the Supreme Court building and grounds, along with tens of millions earmarked for bolstering security operations. A key component is $14.6 million for the Supreme Court Police to expand protective activities at justices’ homes and for their families, plus $2 million for an off-site residential security office.
Kagan testified that the Supreme Court Police anticipate a “very substantial” 38 percent annual increase in threats directed at the nine justices. “For some of us, those threats have come very close, and all of us live with the knowledge that they may again materialize,” she said.
Barrett offered a deeply personal account of the toll those threats have taken. She recalled coming home with a bulletproof vest after the leak of the Dobbs draft opinion in 2022, which overturned Roe v. Wade. Her then-12-year-old child saw it. “They have required me and my children to think about and see things that children should not have to see or think about,” Barrett told lawmakers. “I didn’t know how to respond because maybe I lack imagination, but I didn’t expect that performing this service was going to put me in the position of explaining to my children what a bulletproof vest was and why I had to wear one.”
The justices also detailed a rise in “swatting” incidents—false reports of emergencies intended to intimidate. Police responded to Barrett’s Virginia home in late May after a report of gunshots that turned out to be a hoax. “They’re meant to intimidate, and they’re meant to harass,” she said.
The budget request includes $6.5 million to build an off-site visitor screening facility, modeled after the Capitol Visitor Center, to move security checks out of the Supreme Court building itself. Kagan explained that currently, visitors are screened inside the building, and the court wants to replicate the Capitol’s model of checking people before they enter the main premises.
Several Senate Democrats used the hearing to tie the threat environment to rhetoric from President Trump. Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) read aloud a Truth Social post in which Trump said the country had been “unnecessarily ransacked” after the justices struck down his tariff agenda. “If there’s anyone in the country that commands more attention, it’s the president, and I think that behavior is very dangerous to the court system,” Reed argued.
The hearing came weeks after the Supreme Court handed down final opinions that upheld birthright citizenship and expanded presidential power. Rep. Dave Joyce (R-Ohio), the subcommittee chair, acknowledged the shifting landscape: “New technologies have become accessible for bad actors. The threat environment facing our federal judiciary, including the Supreme Court, has evolved substantially.”
Kagan and Barrett also expressed interest in increasing the size of personal security details, which currently range from four to eight officers per justice. “Over time, we’d like that detail number to increase,” Kagan said in response to a question from Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa).
