US Judiciary Warns of Budget Shortfall as Threats Increase (1)

Top US judiciary officials warned the court system doesn’t have sufficient funds to secure its courthouses, pointing to an increase in safety concerns for judges hearing high-profile national cases.

Judge Robert Conrad, director of the Administrative Office of the US Courts, and Judge Amy J. St. Eve, the chair of the judiciary’s budget committee, told congressional appropriations in a letter released Friday that they have “significant concerns” about the judiciary’s ability to keep courthouses safe under current resource levels.

They noted that Congress has kept the judiciary’s court security budget flat—an effective cut given inflation—for two consecutive fiscal years. A second year at this level will cause “further reductions to courthouse security,” including in equipment to restrict certain areas and screen individuals entering the courthouse, they wrote.

“Consecutive years of flat security funding comes at a time when threats against federal judges and courthouses are escalating, making this situation unsustainable in the current environment,” the letter reads.

The judiciary officials also said that 67 judges involved in high-profile cases or rulings are receiving “enhanced online security screening services” from the AO and US Marshals Service. “In extreme cases, the U.S. Marshals Service has been required to take extraordinary measures to ensure the safety of judges,” the letter says. The US Marshals Service is housed within the Justice Department.

‘Budget Challenges’

The judiciary officials predicted in their letter that more than a third of clerk’s offices and probation and pretrial services offices can’t afford their current employees and will need to downsize staff over the remainder of this fiscal year, which spans through September.

Some court clerk’s offices have reported they don’t have enough staff to man public counters to help people with court filings or other information. And probation offices will have to prioritize resources toward supervising the most violent criminal offenders, meaning mid and low-level offenders won’t receive as much supervision, the letter said.

“We note that these budget challenges are occurring at the same time the administration has announced its prosecutorial priorities, including fentanyl trafficking and fighting cartels and violent gangs,” Conrad and St. Eve wrote.

They also raised concerns about budget constraints for the federal defenders, which is under a hiring freeze. According to the letter, the judiciary will have to put on hold in July roughly $92 million in payments owed to private attorneys, who were appointed to represent criminal defendants who couldn’t afford lawyers, because the courts can’t afford to pay them.

These payment delays could prompt attorneys to decline to accept these appointments in the future, “potentially creating unlawful delays in the constitutional right of defendants to a speedy and fair trial,” the letter said.

Republican Criticism

Judges presiding over high-profile challenges to the Trump administration have faced verbal attacks by the president’s top allies. Hundreds of unsolicited pizzas have been delivered to the homes of judges and their adult children, a threat to signify the sender knows where the judge lives. Some of those pizzas were sent in the name of a New Jersey federal judge’s murdered son.

A handful of House Republicans have filed articles of impeachment against judges who have ruled against Trump. That’s led to rare public criticism from judges including Chief Justice John Roberts, who say impeachment shouldn’t be used for rulings that others don’t agree with.

Republicans have taken particular aim at lower courts’ use of rulings that block policies nationwide. The House passed legislation earlier this month to curb the authority of federal trial court judges to issue so-called nationwide injunctions. However, the measure is unlikely to pass the Senate, where Republicans need some Democratic support to advance bills under chamber rules.

House Republican leaders have also floated the possibility of targeting the judiciary’s budget, in response to rulings against the administration. Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan asked spending leaders in March to consider language “that would enhance judicial restraint and reaffirm democratic principles,” but said judiciary security efforts should still be appropriately funded.

The judiciary’s budget request for fiscal 2026, which begins October 1, will be submitted later this month, according to the letter.

Spokespeople for the Republicans and Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee didn’t immediately return requests for comment Friday.