House Democrats block legislation to increase security for Supreme Court justices.

A bipartisan bill that cleared the Senate to strengthen security for Supreme Court justices despite continuing protests outside their residences is meeting opposition from House Democrats, who believe the provision should be extended to law clerks.

The Senate-passed measure, dubbed the Supreme Court Police Parity Act, was introduced by Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Chris Coons, D-Del., in response to ongoing protests over a leaked draft opinion from the Supreme Court that indicated federal abortion protections granted under Roe v. Wade could soon be overturned.

The bill would give Supreme Court justices and their families round-the-clock security. The Act also empowers Supreme Court police to arrest persons who hinder or obstruct the court’s capacity to carry out its functions and establishes a criminal punishment for those who impede or obstruct those tasks.

However, Democrats in the House, including Democratic leadership, argue that the law does not go far enough in providing security safeguards and that it should be expanded to those who work for the Supreme Court.

In a statement issued Friday, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer, D-Md., said the security protection should be extended to legal clerks and employees who “have increasingly experienced threats to their physical safety.”

“Violence or threats of violence against judges, their clerks, or the families of judicial-branch personnel is never acceptable,” added Hoyer. “Our majority is determined to protect those who serve our country in the federal judiciary, and we believe that this effort must extend not only to the family members of judges and justices but also to the family members of clerks and staff who support them and have increasingly faced threats to their physical safety,” Rep. Stanton’s Supreme Court Families Security Act states.

“While the Senate enacted legislation this week to protect the families of Supreme Court justices, we feel it is vital to protect the families of individuals who choose to serve their country and communities as judicial clerks and staff as well.”

The Supreme Court Families Security Act of 2022, which Hoyer noted, was proposed by Rep. Greg Stanton, D-Ariz. It would “enable the Marshal of the Supreme Court to authorize protection for the immediate families of the justices as well as court personnel, including clerks,” according to his office.

“In the aftermath of the publication of a draft decision overturning Roe v. Wade, the need for adequate security for those in the judicial branch has become more apparent,” Stanton’s office said.

Hoyer expressed confidence that Republicans and Democrats might collaborate to “resolve issues between the two measures.”

Cornyn said that House Democrats are proposing “unnecessary” changes to the bill in order to include those who are “not very public or famous way the justices are.”

“Now the House wants to add legal clerks and other personnel to this, which is really superfluous because almost all law clerks are anonymous,” he added. “They are not as conspicuous or known as the justices, therefore they are unlikely to require such security. Furthermore, our personnel here in Congress is not afforded the same kind of safety.”