Justices Warn: Swats, Vests, Millions

Two Supreme Court justices just walked into Congress together and calmly explained why wearing bulletproof vests, dodging swatting calls, and guarding their kids now needs a price tag in the tens of millions of dollars.

Story Snapshot

Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Elena Kagan made a rare joint appearance on Capitol Hill to ask for more security funding.
The Court is seeking about $228–230 million next year, with more than $14 million focused on personal protection for the nine justices and their families.
Threats against judges and justices have surged in recent years, including swatting incidents and an armed man near Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home.
Congress has boosted Supreme Court security before, but lower-court judges say they still lack comparable protection, raising fairness questions.

Rare testimony that felt more like a warning

Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Justice Elena Kagan did something Supreme Court justices almost never do: they sat before lawmakers and made a direct plea for more security money.

This was the first time since 2019 that any justice had testified in person, and they did it together, one from the Court’s conservative wing and one from its liberal side. That pairing alone sent a message. When the Court’s ideological opposites speak with one voice, something serious is happening.

Their target was the House Appropriations panel that controls much of the federal checkbook. Barrett and Kagan walked through the budget request for the Court’s next fiscal year: about $228 to nearly $230 million in total, roughly a 10 percent jump.

Most Americans never look at these line items. But hidden in that number is a key detail. Over $14 million is earmarked to expand personal protection for the nine justices, their homes, and their families.

What the justices say they are facing at home

Justice Barrett told lawmakers that threats against her and her colleagues were no longer abstract. She described having to wear a bulletproof vest on the way home a few years ago and then explain to her 12-year-old son what that vest was and why his mother needed it.

That is not normal civic life. It is the language of people who expect to be targets. Barrett’s security detail also handled a recent “swatting” incident, when a fake emergency call sent police racing to her home.

That story did not stand alone. The broader judiciary reports hundreds of threats each year against federal judges nationwide.

The United States Marshals Service, which protects judges, has tracked sharp increases since the mid-2010s, with recent years reaching some of the highest levels in decades. After the Dobbs abortion decision leaked in 2022, protests moved straight to justices’ front yards.

Congress answered with a one-time $30 million security boost for the Court, designed to last through 2028, but Barrett and Kagan now say the threat has outgrown that patch.

Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Elena Kagan pleaded for more security funding – saying they face an alarming rise in threats. It comes after police arrested a man they say had a gun and asked for directions to the Supreme Court. Jay O'Brien reports. https://t.co/l4TqTNTlDQ pic.twitter.com/tF2MTliPJ6

— World News Tonight (@ABCWorldNews) July 15, 2026

How much money and what it actually buys

The security request is not vague. Budget documents and testimony show that roughly $14.6 million of the new funding would go toward expanding personal protection for justices, including adding six more agents per justice.

Another $2 million would fund an off-site residential security post, meant to cut response times when trouble comes to a justice’s neighborhood. The judiciary as a whole is requesting roughly $920 million for security, a $29 million increase over the previous year.

Justice Kagan told lawmakers that almost all recent growth in the Court’s budget has gone to security. Aside from inflation, she said, the Court’s spending now primarily rises to address “evolving risks” and “changing threats.”

In plain terms, the Supreme Court Police need more bodies and better tools. Part of the ask even covers a planned new screening structure outside the Court building, so visitors can be checked before they get anywhere near the marble steps.

Conservative common sense: safety first, but play fair

From an American view, the first question is simple: should judges and justices be safe at home and at work? The answer is yes. The rule of law collapses if those who issue rulings live in fear.

Armed men stalking Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s neighborhood and fake 911 calls to Barrett’s house cross every bright line. Protecting the people who interpret the Constitution is not a luxury; it is a basic duty of government.

But there is another side conservatives will not ignore. Congress has often rushed to cover the Supreme Court first, leaving lower-court judges waiting in line.

Washington Post reporting shows that only the Supreme Court received new security funds in recent legislation, even as other judges warned of the same rising threats. That creates a two-tier justice system, not in law but in safety.

Politics, media, and the risk of a security bubble

Major media outlets have largely echoed the Court’s threat narrative, focusing on swatting incidents, protests, and rising numbers, with little challenge to the underlying data. That shared framing can be useful, because it alerts the public to real danger.

Yet it can also create a kind of security bubble, where any request tied to “evolving threats” glides through on fear rather than facts. Careful conservatives will ask for audits, hard numbers, and clear limits.

Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett pitched increased security funding for the Supreme Court next year at a pair of rare congressional hearings for sitting justices Tuesday that covered issues ranging from emergency cases to judicial ethics.https://t.co/KBGpgFlXmC

— Roll Call (@rollcall) July 14, 2026

Those questions do not erase what Barrett and Kagan described. They sharpen it. If threats are rising, the Supreme Court needs protection that reflects reality, not politics. If lower courts face the same storm, they deserve equal care.

The rare image of Barrett and Kagan sitting side by side before Congress should remind Americans of something simple: the robe does not make a person bulletproof. The country’s job is to make sure they do not have to pretend it does.