Deputy Fletcher Veitch of the U.S. Marshals Service and Brando, an explosives detection canine for the Marshals Service, pictured by the Washington, D.C., federal courthouse in 2015. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM.

The House appears prepared to grant the Justice Department's first directly requested increase in appropriations for judicial protection in several years.

The U.S. Marshals Service made the request earlier this year, asking for a $4.8 million bump in funding for its judicial protection operations and intelligence initiative to add 19 new positions, including 13 agents.

A House report accompanying an appropriations bill for the Justice Department, marked up earlier this month, directs more than $501.3 million be used for judicial and courthouse security. That's a $19.2 million increase from the amount dedicated overall to the topic in the previous fiscal year, according to committee spokesperson Evan Hollander. Last year's bill tapped more than $485.2 million in funds for judicial and courthouse security.

"The Appropriations Committee provided an increase for the U.S. Marshals Service and noted in the report accompanying the Commerce-Justice-Science bill that we believe the resources we have provided will allow USMS to sustain efforts on judicial protection," Hollander said in an email.

Concerns about judicial security have been amplified in recent days over the fatal shooting at U.S. District Judge Esther Salas' New Jersey home, which left her son dead and her husband in critical condition.

A "men's rights" and anti-feminist attorney, Roy Den Hollander, is the primary suspect in the shooting, and is now reportedly linked to another homicide in California of another men's rights activist. Hollander was found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot shortly after Sunday's shooting.

Hollander previously had a case before Salas, challenging the military draft's requirement that only men, not women, enlist. He filed the complaint in 2015, but withdrew from the case last year and was replaced by another team of attorneys.

House reports accompanying appropriation bills in recent years have steadily set an increased amount of funds for judicial and courthouse security, up from $470 million in fiscal year 2019.

The U.S. Marshals Service's budget request earlier this year is the first time in at least five years the service explicitly sought more funds for judicial protection, according to public budget documents.

"This request will strengthen the USMS judicial security mission by adding additional personnel for protective intelligence and operations," the funding request reads. "The protective intelligence mission develops information that enables the USMS to prevent harm to USMS-protectees, which allows justice to be served without fear of reprisal or repercussion."

The budget document says there are currently 71 positions dedicated to the intelligence and operations initiative, with a budget of $21.3 million.

The document does not tie the request for increased funding to an uptick in threats against judiciary staff, including the court employees, prosecutors and judges who fall under the scope of the marshals' protection.

A U.S. Marshals Service annual report for fiscal year 2019 shows a significant uptick in threats to protected persons or inappropriate communications in recent years. There were 926 of those threats and communications in fiscal year 2015, a number that steadily increased to peak at 4,542 in fiscal year 2018, and slightly dipping to 4,449 in fiscal year 2019. However, the report notes that the increase "represents the improved effectiveness in data collection and reporting of potential threats."

The U.S. Marshals made the request under the larger umbrella of salaries and expenses for the bureau, seeking more than $1.61 billion in funds. The House appropriations bill that covers the Justice Department, as well as other agencies, grants most of that request with an appropriation of $1.48 billion. While below the requested amount, it's an increase of roughly $54.2 million in funds included in last year's bill.

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies advanced the bill earlier this month, but judicial protection was not raised during the hearing.