US Chief Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor, Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Samuel A. Alito, Jr. and Elena Kagan pose for a group portrait at the Supreme Court in Washington, US, October 7, 2022.
Evelyn Hockstein Reuters
With security threats to Supreme Court justices still fresh memories, Chief Justice John Roberts on Friday praised programs that protect judges, saying that “we must support judges by ensuring their safety.”
Roberts and other conservative Supreme Court justices were the subject of protests, some in their homes, after the May leak of a court decision that ultimately removed constitutional protections for abortion. Justice Samuel Alito said the leaks made conservative judges “targets for assassination.” And in June, a man carrying a gun, knife and zip-line was arrested near Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home after threatening to kill the justice, whose vote was key to overturning the court’s Roe v Wade decision.
Roberts, writing in his annual year-end report on the federal judiciary, didn’t specifically mention the abortion decision, but the case and its reaction loomed large in his mind.
“Judicial opinions speak for themselves, and there is no obligation in our country to freely agree with them. Indeed, we judges often dissent – sometimes strongly – from the opinions of our colleagues’, and we explain what in public writing about the case before us.” wrote Roberts.
Polls after the abortion decision show public confidence in the court is at an all-time high. And two of Roberts’ liberal colleagues who dissented in the abortion case, Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, said the court should worry about overturning precedent and appearing political.
After the leaks and threats to Kavanaugh, lawmakers passed legislation that increased security protections for judges and their families. Separately, in December, lawmakers passed legislation protecting the personal information of federal judges including their addresses.
The law is named for U.S. District Judge Esther Salas’ 20-year-old son Daniel Anderl, who was killed in the family’s New Jersey home by a man who previously had a case before him.
Roberts thanked members of Congress “who attended to the security needs of the courts.” And he said the program that protects judges “is important to open the court system.”
In writing about court security, Roberts tells the story of Judge Ronald N. Davies, who in September 1957 ordered the integration of Little Rock Central High School in Arkansas. The Davies decision follows the Brown v. Board of Education decision. The Supreme Court ruled that segregated schools were unconstitutional and rejected efforts by Arkansas Gov. Orval Faubus to end school integration.
Davies was “physically threatened for following the law,” but the judge “didn’t understand,” Roberts said.
“The judicial system cannot and should not live in fear. The Little Rock incident teaches us that the rule of law is more important than the crowd,” he wrote.
Roberts noted that officials are currently working on the courtroom Davies presided over in 1957. Roberts said the judge’s bench used by Davies and other artifacts from the courtroom have been preserved and will be installed in a recreated courtroom at the federal courthouse in Little. Rock “so that this important artifact will be used to hold court again.”
However, before that happens, the judge’s bench will be displayed as part of an exhibit at the Supreme Court starting in the fall and for several years to come, he said.
“The exhibit will introduce visitors to the workings of the federal court system, the history of racial segregation and desegregation in our country, and the contributions of Thurgood Marshall as a lawyer,” Roberts said. Marshall, who overruled Brown v. Board of Education, became the first Black judge on the Supreme Court in 1967.
The Supreme Court is still grappling with complex issues involving race. Two cases this term deal with affirmative action, and the conservative majority of the court is expected to be used to reverse the decade of decisions that allow colleges to take account of race in admission. In other cases, judges could strike down the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, the crown jewel of the civil rights movement.
The judges will hear the first arguments in 2023 on January 9.