Judicial Security Resources Stretched Amid Rising Threats

Budget cuts to the agency tasked with protecting federal judges and courthouses are straining resources amid a rise in threats against the judiciary and the additional responsibilities of providing 24/7 protection to Supreme Court justices.

Congress chopped $13 million this fiscal year off the roughly $1.7 billion budget for salaries and expenses for the US Marshals Service. The judiciary’s separate court security budget, which covers the salaries of guards at courthouses who work with marshals, remains the same as last fiscal year. It’s an effective cut given inflation.

The cuts, which took effect in March and run through the end of the fiscal year in September, represent just under 1% of what the Marshals Service spends on salaries and expenses. But the agency is feeling the impact due to higher costs, and as the number of investigated threats against judges has more than doubled in the past four years.

Budget cuts to the marshals “were not as steep as we feared,” but “we still took a hit,” said Chief Judge Dana Sabraw of the US District Court for the Southern District of California, in San Diego. “The bottom line is, we’re all doing with a little less, including the marshals, in our security,” Sabraw said.

Deputy Marshals

The agency has lost 72 deputy marshal positions as a result at the same time that thousands of other positions across the Justice Department were eliminated due to budget cuts, Attorney General Merrick Garland said in congressional testimony in April. The agency had funding for 4,038 deputy marshals in fiscal 2023, but is now down to 3,966 funded positions, according to budget documents released in March.

Judge Richard Sullivan of the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, who chairs the Judicial Conference’s committee on judicial security, said by email that the Marshals Service has “found ways to retain security staff in the short term, but it’s come at a cost.” That includes putting “critical new security systems projects” on ice, he said.

“In the long run, resources will be needed to allow these projects to continue so that judges can make the tough decisions they are required to make without living in fear of retribution,” Sullivan said.

A Marshals Service spokesman said the agency’s leadership “must make hard decisions to meet the demands of all the core missions,” which include judicial and courthouse security, fugitive apprehension, prisoner security and transportation, and witness protection.

Security funding for the judiciary also wasn’t spared, after lawmakers kept amounts equal without adjusting for inflation.

A spokesperson for the Administrative Office of the US Courts—whose budget funds court security officers—said the agency is “disappointed by the funding shortfall,” and similarly, that it has an impact on some projects like courthouse security system initiatives.

The AO has, however, worked with the marshals “to adjust funding priorities to ensure that security staffing levels are maintained,” according to the spokesperson.

‘Significant’ Cut

In addition to the cut to salaries and expenses in the spending bill enacted in March, the Marshals Service also received a roughly 17% cut in its construction budget to $15 million, and a 1.4% cut from its federal prisoner detention funding, to $2.1 billion.

“Even a flat budget was concerning to me when I was in the government,” said Carl Caulk, former assistant director of the Marshals Service. “But to the extent that there’s a cut, it’s even more significant.”

The agency’s budget for judicial security is dwarfed by the prisoner detention allotment, and that mission is overshadowed by its higher profile—and often dangerous—work of apprehending fugitives.

A deputy marshal was among four law enforcement officers killed by gunfire on Monday when a task force sought to serve an arrest warrant in Charlotte, North Carolina, the agency said in a statement. Thomas Weeks began his Marshals Service career assigned to the superior court in Washington, D.C.

The marshals spokesman said that protecting the federal judiciary “will remain a primary mission.”

Former marshals speculated that the brunt of the budget hit would be felt mostly in areas like operations to track down and apprehend fugitives.

Still, the loss of 72 deputy positions that courts may have been expecting—nearly one person for each of the 94 judicial districts—could have a “profound effect” on districts facing an uptick of threats against judges, said Jon Trainum, former chief of protective operations within the marshals’ judicial security division.

The agency investigated 179 threats against judges and 81 against federal prosecutors in 2019, according to data provided by the Marshals Service. In 2023, marshals reported 457 threats against judges and 155 against prosecutors.

Trainum estimated 72 positions was the equivalent of roughly two Marshals Service academy classes.

“This isn’t their first rodeo with a budget cut,” he said. “They start with cutting basic classes, so there’s no new hiring, there’s no new deputy US Marshals, and there’s no filling vacancies within the districts. So they continue with status quo for as long as they can.”

The degree of impact also hinges on how much attrition is experienced within the marshals, as the agency may be temporarily unable to backfill positions for departing or retiring employees.

If the judicial districts are “not getting the bodies that they need, it becomes difficult to put bodies in courtrooms, which tends to delay or change judicial proceedings,” Trainum said.

He added that staffing issues may also “have a significant impact on morale” within judicial districts.

Supreme Court

Personnel resources are further strained by the increased need for maintaining personal protective details for Supreme Court justices. The marshals asked Congress for an additional $28 million for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1 for personnel and equipment for round-the-clock protection at the residences of the nine justices.

The marshals previously only provided protection for the justices during travel, but Garland ordered 24/7 security after the May 2022 leak of a draft Supreme Court ruling overturning the constitutional right to abortion, according to budget documents outlining the agency’s funding requests.

After the draft opinion leaked, an armed California man was arrested outside Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s Maryland home and later indicted with trying to assassinate him.

The agency told Congress it needed the additional funds because it’s “not permanently staffed” for the justices’ protection detail. The request says the agency has had to rely on deputy marshals from across the country to temporarily protect them on two- to three-week rotations. Recently graduated deputies have also participated.

Nearly a quarter of deputy marshals did a rotation protecting a justice’s home last fiscal year, according to budget documents. Due to challenges finding volunteers and limits on overtime work, deputies are sent to complete a 75-day protection detail “immediately after” graduating from the academy and completing coursework.

And the justices aren’t the only potential targets for whom the agency must provide 24/7 protection.

The marshals also said the agency is “providing an unprecedented number of other high-value protective details,” including “federal judges presiding over high-threat trials and high-visibility cases receiving nationwide attention require protection, as well as the Department-appointed special counsels prosecuting sensitive cases.”

US District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing Special Counsel Jack Smith’s election interference criminal case against former President Donald Trump, was the recently the victim of so-called “swatting” incident after a false report of a shooting was made about her private residence.

Temporary details are “very costly” to the marshals, Caulk said, citing travel and hotel costs. They can also exacerbate staffing shortages for districts that loaned out a deputy.

“There’s an exponential effect at the local level in the field because they’re not getting new staff, and they’re also still losing their old staff to these temporary details,” Caulk said.

—With assistance from Jacqueline Thomsen