WASHINGTON — Justice Amy Coney Barrett on Tuesday recounted a recent ”swatting” incident at her home in testimony before Congress as the Supreme Court seeks additional funds to combat a rise in security threats.
Subscribe to read this story ad-free
Get unlimited access to ad-free articles and exclusive content.
Barrett, a member of the court’s conservative majority, is appearing alongside liberal Justice Elena Kagan at back-to-back hearings in the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government and the Senate’s version of that committee.
Supreme Court justices as well as judges throughout the federal judiciary have increasingly been the targets of threats, harassment and “swatting” incidents, in which false calls are made to police about violence at their home addresses.
In her remarks during the House hearing, Barrett confirmed details of the incident that took place in May at her home in Fairfax County, Virginia.
“One of my teenage sons opened the door to go out with friends and saw in our street, it was full of police cars who had responded to a false report of gunshots and raised voices in my home,” she said.
“I was very, very grateful that I had Supreme Court police outside my home because they were able to stop and meet with and explain to the county police that it had been a false alarm, and so the police did not actually attempt to enter our home,” she added.
Barrett, who has at times faced vitriolic criticism from MAGA activists for her occasional votes against President Donald Trump, also told lawmakers about her security detail giving her a bulletproof vest several years ago and having to explain what it was to one of her children.
“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,” she said.
The justices faced a receptive audience, with members of Congress also facing regular threats and harassment.
“Whatever one’s view of the specific Supreme Court ruling, judicial officers, up to and including the justices of the Supreme Court, must be able to do their jobs without fear for their safety or their family’s safety,” said Rep. Dave Joyce, R-Ohio, who chairs the House subcommittee.
“Congress must provide sufficient funding to ensure the safety of all judicial personnel,” said Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., the senior Democrat on the subcommittee,
But Democrats have also been critical of the court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, for adopting a new ethics code that does not have an enforcement mechanism, saying that ethics lapses have contributed to a decline in public support for the institution.
Kagan, who has previously said she supports an enforceable ethics code, reiterated that view, but conceded that it is a “difficult question” because the system needs to be controlled by the judiciary, not the executive branch or Congress, in order to protect the independence of the judiciary.
Barrett said she was “less certain” than Kagan about the idea of having an enforcement mechanism comprised of a committee of retired judges.
Both justices also faced questions about the recent rise in emergency applications that circumvent the normal, lengthy appeals process. The court has frequently ruled in favor of the Trump administration in these cases, often without a detailed explanation. The process has become known as the “shadow docket,” a phrase the court itself has not embraced.
Kagan, who has been critical of the court’s handling of some cases in the past, said there has been a recent effort to provide more transparency. She noted that the court heard oral arguments and issued a full written ruling in the recent case involving Trump’s attempt to fire Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve.
“I think over time we have at least tried to do better in important cases, ensuring that we have some degree of sort of regular-ish process,” she added.
The court is asking Congress for $228.4 million, an increase of $20.5 million over the previous fiscal year. Although the Supreme Court is at the top of the federal judiciary, it is funded separately.
The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which has oversight over the lower courts, is also seeking additional money for security in a separate budget request.
The Supreme Court’s proposed budget includes $14.6 million in additional funding for the Supreme Court’s own police department and for security at its building across the street from the Capitol in Washington.
The police department recently took on expanded responsibilities for protecting justices at their homes.
This task was previously carried out by the Marshals Service, which beefed up protection in 2022 following the leak of a draft opinion showing that the court was poised to overturn the landmark abortion rights ruling Roe v. Wade.
Another $6.5 million would be earmarked for a new visitor screening facility on the Supreme Court grounds, while $2.3 million would go toward combating cyber threats.
In total, the court predicts that it would spend $40 million on protecting justices from physical threats and $18 million on cyber threats.
The increase in threats and harassment against judges across the board has coincided with harsh criticism of judges who rule against them by prominent politicians, including Trump. Many judges have received threats through anonymous pizza deliveries to their homes — a move that has become a common tactic of intimidation.
In October, Sophie Roske was sentenced to eight years in prison after being arrested near the home of conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh while armed with a gun.
On Monday, Capitol Police arrested a man with a gun at a barricade outside of the Capitol after he asked for directions to the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his annual report in 2024 that the number of threats against judges has tripled over the last decade.
There have been 370 threats against federal judges in fiscal year 2026, which began in October, according to the U.S. Marshals Service.
Justices have testified in Congress about the court’s budget regularly in the past, but Tuesday’s hearings mark the first time any member of the court has testified at a House hearing since 2019. No justice has testified before the Senate since 2011.
