Pending Bill Would Beef Up Security for Supreme Court Justices
The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to take up a bill Thursday that would expand the jurisdiction of the marshal of the Supreme Court and the court's police force to protect justices "in any location."
October 16, 2019 at 04:14 PM
4 minute read
The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday will consider a proposal aimed at improving security for U.S. Supreme Court justices, not only in the United States but abroad as well.
At the hearing, where a slate of judicial appointees and one U.S. attorney are set to be considered, the committee will also weigh S. 2511, a bill that would expand the jurisdiction of the marshal of the Supreme Court and the court's police force to protect justices "in any location." The current version of the relevant part of the U.S. code, 40 U.S.C. 6121, confines the authority to "any state."
The bill also would make the authority permanent, deleting the provision in the current statute that sunsets it Dec. 29. Another provision of the current law authorizes law enforcement to protect "an official guest" of the court, and to carry firearms to provide that protection, if the chief justice or an associate justice authorizes it. The proposed bill would expand that power beyond U.S. borders as well.
Committee chairman Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Arizona, introduced the bill Sept. 19.
In a statement at the time, Graham said, "I'm very pleased to be working with Senator Sinema on this necessary legislation to protect the Supreme Court. We live in volatile times and this bill will permanently reauthorize security for the Supreme Court Justices when they travel outside the grounds of the Court. The rule of law is one of the fundamental principles of democracy, and we should do all we can to protect our judicial institutions. I'm certain this bill will become law."
Sinema stated: "Permanently renewing the Supreme Court's security is a smart use of taxpayer dollars and ensures the Court's police have the resources they need to protect our justices."
Elaborating on the details of the legislation, the committee statement added that "Permanent reauthorization would provide Supreme Court Police the resources and ability to deal with gaps in security caused by temporary reauthorizations. This legislation would allow Justices to be protected domestically and internationally if necessary, mirroring the authority given to the Capitol Police and Secret Service as they protect members of Congress and the President."
Security for justices outside of the United States became an issue in 2012 when Justice Stephen Breyer was confronted at his vacation home in the Caribbean island of Nevis by a machete-wielding robber. It was not clear at the time how much security Breyer was provided—and by whom—when he stayed at Nevis.
According to Scotus Map, a website that tracks events that include the justices, five justices have made eight known appearances outside the country this year. The protocol for such trips is for Supreme Court police to coordinate their protection with other U.S. officials and foreign law enforcement.
After the death in Texas of Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016, a "policy directive" defining the scope of U.S. Marshals Service protection for justices was released under the Freedom of Information Act to Fix the Court, an organization that advocates for transparency. The document said, "The United States Marshals Service will assist the marshal of the U.S. Supreme Court and the Supreme Court police to ensure the safety and security of justices who are traveling domestically outside the greater Washington, D.C. metropolitan area." There was no mention of foreign travel.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readWill Khan Resign? FTC Chair Isn't Saying Whether She'll Stick Around After Giving Up Gavel
'Almost Impossible'?: Squire Challenge to Sanctions Spotlights Difficulty of Getting Off Administration's List
4 minute readDC Judge Rules Russia Not Immune in Ukrainian Arbitration Award Dispute
2 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250