Supreme Court justices told Congress on Tuesday that threats against them have surged and asked lawmakers to approve a roughly 10% increase in the court’s security budget. Justice Amy Coney Barrett described being sent home with a bulletproof vest and being targeted in a “swatting” hoax at her house.
Barrett and Justice Elena Kagan appeared before a House subcommittee, the first time sitting justices have testified before Congress since 2019 outside of Senate confirmation hearings for nominees. Kagan said the Supreme Court’s police force expects a 38% increase in threats this year, following a 25% rise last year.
“For some of us, those threats have come very close,” Kagan told the subcommittee.
A Vest and a False Emergency Call

Barrett gave lawmakers a personal account of the threats she and her family have faced, focusing on how the experience has affected her children. She said that when threats intensified after a draft of the court’s 2022 ruling overturning Roe v. Wade leaked to the public, her security detail sent her home wearing a bulletproof vest. Her then 12-year-old son asked what it was.
“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,” Barrett said.
Barrett also described a swatting incident about six weeks earlier, the first time she has discussed it publicly. Officers responded to her home after a false report claimed gunshots and raised voices were coming from inside. One of her teenage sons opened the door to leave the house and found a large police presence outside. Barrett said she was grateful Supreme Court police were stationed at her residence, because they were able to intercept the responding local officers and explain that the report was fraudulent before the situation escalated.
Several federal judges have also received unsolicited pizza deliveries made in the name of Daniel Anderl, the son of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas. Anderl was fatally shot in 2020 at the family’s New Jersey home by a disgruntled lawyer who had appeared before Salas in court.
“Many of us, me included, have received threatening, anonymous deliveries designed to intimidate and harass us,” Barrett said. “I think the message on these deliveries being sent in his name is clear.”
The hearing came two weeks after the Supreme Court closed a nine-month term marked by major legal disputes involving President Donald Trump and his administration. The court backed several key elements of Trump’s expansive use of executive authority during that term. Its 6-3 conservative majority has issued rulings reshaping law on abortion, presidential power and other contested issues, while drawing sustained ethics criticism and a decline in public approval ratings.
Threats Extend Across the Federal Judiciary

Data from the U.S. Marshals Service shows nearly 400 judges faced threats last year, and 276 have been targeted so far this year as of July 1.
Barrett, one of Trump’s three appointees to the court, and Kagan, one of three justices appointed by Democratic presidents, both defended the court’s request for close to $230 million in the next fiscal year, an increase of roughly 10% over this year’s budget.
Chief Justice John Roberts addressed the issue in March, calling personal hostility directed at judges “dangerous” and saying “it’s got to stop.” He made the comment days after Trump posted criticism on social media targeting judges who had ruled against his administration. Roberts had also flagged the trend in his 2024 end-of-year report, writing that identified threats had risen sharply across all levels of the judiciary in recent years.
One of the most serious incidents took place in 2022, when a California resident armed with a handgun was found near Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home in Maryland. Sophie Roske pleaded guilty to attempted assassination and was sentenced last year to eight years in federal prison.
Divide Over Ethics Enforcement

The Supreme Court adopted its first code of conduct in 2023 after years of scrutiny over justices’ financial disclosures and outside relationships. Critics said the code fell short because it left recusal decisions up to individual justices and included no enforcement mechanism.
Kagan repeated her support Tuesday for creating a judicial panel to enforce compliance with the ethics code, arguing that such a body would help maintain public confidence in the court. She said the justices are taking the code seriously and making what she called successful efforts to follow it.
Barrett offered a different view, saying she was “less certain” an enforcement mechanism was needed. She pointed to unresolved questions, including who would select the members of any enforcement panel.
Questions about individual justices’ conduct have continued in the background. Justice Samuel Alito told The New York Times that an upside-down American flag displayed outside one of his homes after the 2020 election was placed there by his wife during a dispute with a neighbor over a lawn sign critical of Trump. The inverted flag became a rallying symbol for Trump supporters who backed his false claims of widespread fraud in the 2020 election, which he lost to Democrat Joe Biden.
Justice Clarence Thomas has defended his decision not to disclose luxury trips paid for by Republican donor Harlan Crow, saying he believed the trips qualified as exempt personal hospitality under disclosure rules. Thomas has also described the omission of a real estate transaction involving Crow from his financial disclosure forms as unintentional.
A Budget Request Shaped by Two Different Pressures
Tuesday’s testimony tied together two separate strands facing the court: physical security for the justices and their families, and the ongoing debate over how much oversight the court should accept for its own conduct. Barrett and Kagan agreed on the first point, describing threats in similar terms and jointly backing the funding increase. They split on the second, with Kagan pushing for external enforcement of the ethics code and Barrett stopping short of endorsing it.
That divide mirrors the broader gap between the court’s conservative and liberal wings on questions of institutional accountability, even as both sides describe a shared and escalating security problem. The swatting incident at Barrett’s home and the pizza deliveries invoking Judge Salas’s late son point to a pattern that goes beyond the Supreme Court itself, reaching federal judges nationwide who have ruled on politically charged cases.
Congress has not indicated when it might act on the court’s budget request. The subcommittee hearing gave the justices a public platform to make their case directly, an unusual step for a court that typically avoids testifying before lawmakers outside the confirmation process.































