Supreme Court Justices Barrett and Kagan discuss security funding on Capitol Hill

Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett met with lawmakers on Tuesday for a regular budget hearing.

SCOTT DETROW, HOST: The Supreme Court did something today it has not done in seven years. It sent two of its justices to Capitol Hill to testify about its budget request for the coming year. The budget has grown dramatically in recent years because of the equally dramatic rise in the number and intensity of threats to the justices' safety. NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg joins us now to talk about today's hearings, which took place before the House and Senate appropriations subcommittees that do deal with the court's funding. Hi, Nina. NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: Hi there. DETROW: What's the headline from this? TOTENBERG: The headline is basically that Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett were essentially preaching to the choir today because members of Congress, of both parties, have in recent years also experienced a large spike in threats. Indeed, as Justice Kagan pointed out, it was Republican Darrell Issa and Democrat Elijah Cummings who insisted that the court beef up its security 10 years ago after Justice Antonin Scalia died in his sleep on a hunting trip, with no security anywhere nearby to respond quickly. (SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING) ELENA KAGAN: They said, kind of, like, we think you're crazy, you know, that you have less security than the director of the Office of Personnel Management does, and we think that you have to do better. TOTENBERG: Before that, the justices basically had little to no security. They drove their own cars to work, went to the movies and shopped at supermarkets unaccompanied and did their private travel on their own. And frankly, they liked it that way because, also frankly, having security is personally invasive. But the number of threats has grown so exponentially that they had to undertake major changes to protect the justices and their homes at all times and funding additional cybersecurity measures. And yet, as Justice Kagan pointed out, the court's budget of 207 million is extremely modest. It's just one-tenth of 1% of the entire federal budget. DETROW: Did either justice, either Kagan or Barrett, give any specifics about the way these threats have affected them and their families? TOTENBERG: Yes, they did. Justice Barrett came prepared to give two good illustrations. First was the day she brought home a bulletproof vest. (SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING) AMY CONEY BARRETT: My 12-year-old son was standing in the doorway of my bedroom, and he wanted to know what it was. And I didn't know how to respond because 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. TOTENBERG: She also described how just six weeks ago, her house was swatted, with local police responding to a fake emergency call. The locals would have invaded the Barrett home but for the fact that her own Supreme Court detail was there to prevent it. Several committee members also asked about the Supreme Court's ethics requirements, noting that members of Congress and the executive branch are limited to gifts under $50, while the Supreme Court has no such limit. Democratic Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro said she supports a bill that would ban most gifts, and she similarly called for some sort of enforcement mechanism for the ethics rules adopted by the Supreme Court itself. But Justice Kagan, who said she favors an enforcement mechanism, said that creating such a system is really hard. After all, as she noted, you wouldn't want either the president or Congress imposing a system on the court because that would lead to compromising the independence of the judiciary. One idea that Kagan seemed to like would be to create a panel of distinguished retired judges to enforce the court's ethics code, but Justice Barrett seemed unpersuaded. (SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING) BARRETT: Who selects the judges? How is the panel comprised? TOTENBERG: That answer shows you how hard it can be to get the court to agree on new remedies. DETROW: When it comes to the broader political climate, though, I'm curious. Was there any discussion today about, you know, specifically President Trump's furious and personal reaction to some of the court's recent rulings? TOTENBERG: Yes. Democratic Senator Jack Reed asked about that, and Justice Kagan responded by citing the chief justice's 2025 year-end report. (SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING) KAGAN: And he talked about, like, criticism is fair game. I mean, go for it. But intimidation is a different thing entirely. And when political figures of any stripe are trying to intimidate judges, that's where we really have crossed a line. DETROW: Any other topics of note, Nina? TOTENBERG: There was a lot of talk also about the court's emergency docket. We'll have more about that tomorrow on Morning Edition. DETROW: I'll tune in. That is NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg. Thank you so much. TOTENBERG: Thank you, Scott. Copyright © 2026 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information. Accuracy and availability of NPR transcripts may vary. Transcript text may be revised to correct errors or match updates to audio. Audio on npr.org may be edited after its original broadcast or publication. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

An earlier version of this audio story incorrectly stated that the Supreme Court police force expanded by 38% this year. The correct statistic is that court police expect a 38% annual increase in threats this year, as stated by Justice Elena Kagan during the congressional testimony.