U.S. Supreme Court Justices 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 their group portrait at the Supreme Court in Washington, U.S., October 7, 2022.
Evelyn Hockstein | Reuters
With security threats to Supreme Court justices still fresh memories, Chief Justice John Roberts on Saturday praised programs to protect judges, saying “we must support the judges by ensuring their safety.”
Roberts and other conservative Supreme Court justices were the subject of protests, some at their homes, which, following the leak of a court decision in May, eventually stripped the safeguards. constitutional defense of abortion. Justice Samuel Alito has said that the leak made conservative judges “targets of assassination.” And in June, a man carrying a gun, knife and lanyard was arrested near the home of Judge Brett Kavanaugh after threatening to kill the judge, whose key vote to overturn Roe v. Wade of the court.
Roberts, writing in an annual report on the federal justice agency, did not specifically mention the abortion decision, but the case and reaction to it seemed clear in his mind. .
“Judicial opinions speak for themselves, and in our free country there is no obligation to agree with them. Indeed, our judges frequently disagree – sometimes strongly strongly – with the opinions of colleagues, and we explain why in public articles about the cases before us,” Roberts wrote.
Post-abortion polls show public trust in the courts is at historic lows. And two of Roberts’ libertarian colleagues who disagreed on the abortion case, Judges Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, said the court should be concerned with reversing precedent and being political. .
Following the leak and threat to Kavanaugh, lawmakers passed legislation to increase security protections for judges and their families. Separately, in December, lawmakers passed legislation that protects federal judges’ personal information including their addresses.
The law is named for the son of US District Judge Esther Salas, 20-year-old Daniel Anderl, who was killed in the family’s New Jersey home by a man who had previously been involved in the case before her. .
Roberts thanked members of Congress “who are responding to judicial security needs.” And he said judge protection programs are “necessary to run a court system.”
In writing about judicial security, Roberts tells the story of Judge Ronald N. Davies, who in September 1957 ordered the merger of Little Rock Central High School in Arkansas. Davies’ decision follows the Supreme Court’s ruling in Brown v. Board of Education that segregated schools are unconstitutional and rejects Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus’ efforts to block school integration.
Roberts said Davies “was physically threatened for obeying the law”, but the judge “was not scared at all”.
“A justice system cannot and should not live in fear,” he wrote. The events in Little Rock teach the importance of the rule of law rather than following the crowd.
Roberts notes that officials are currently working to recreate the courtroom that Davies presided over in 1957. Roberts said the judge’s bench was used by Davies and other artifacts from the courtroom have been restored. preserved and will be installed in a reconstructed courtroom at a federal courthouse in Little. Rock “so that these important artifacts will be used to hold the trial again.”
Before that happens, however, the judge’s bench will be on display as part of an exhibit at the Supreme Court starting in the fall and over the next few years, he said.
“The exhibit will introduce visitors to how the federal court system works, the history of racism and discrimination in our country, as well as discrimination,” says Roberts. the great contributions of Thurgood Marshall as an advocate”. Marshall, who contested the Brown v. Board of Education case, became the Supreme Court’s first Black judge in 1967.
The Supreme Court is still grappling with complex issues related to race. Two cases this semester involve affirmative action, and the court’s conservative majority is expected to use them to overturn decades-old decisions that allowed colleges to take race into account. Admissions. In another case, the judges could undermine the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, the crown jewel of the civil rights movement.
The judges will hear their first arguments in 2023 on January 9.
