[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 81 (Thursday, May 12, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2466-S2467]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           U.S. Supreme Court

  Madam President, now on another matter, 2 years ago, the Democratic 
leader addressed a crowd on the steps of the Supreme Court and 
threatened Justices if they didn't rule the way he wanted. Now far-left 
crowds are surrounding Justices' private family homes. They want to use 
intimidation to influence the outcome in a pending case. It should be 
easy for leaders to condemn. All Americans should agree

[[Page S2467]]

that judges and juries ought not to be subjected to threats or 
intimidation campaigns.
  Admirably, some on the political left have spoken out against this 
fringe element. The Washington Post editorial board has condemned this. 
The No. 2 Senate Democrat, our colleague from Illinois, said:

       I think it's reprehensible. Stay away from homes and 
     families.

  His counterpart across the Capitol, the No. 2 House Democrat, Leader 
Hoyer, said:

       We need to protect Supreme Court Justices and their 
     families, period. We're a nation of laws, not of violence, 
     not of intimidation . . . laws.

  That was Steny Hoyer.
  But Leader Schumer and the White House will not follow suit. They 
won't condemn the harassment. They have basically endorsed it. And top 
Democrats are standing in the way of concrete action.
  A few days ago, the Senate unanimously passed legislation to give the 
Supreme Court's in-house police force some additional authorities they 
need to do their jobs. This isn't controversial stuff. It cleared this 
Chamber unanimously. But House Democrats have been unwilling to 
promptly pass it.
  Congressman Jeffries suggested yesterday this uncontroversial bill 
might be shunted into a lengthy committee process. Why in the world 
would that be done? These are essentially clerical fixes. They breezed 
through the Senate without objection. But House Democratic leadership 
wants to drag this out with hearings and markups, while mobs assemble 
at people's houses?
  I hope this is some misunderstanding. I hope Democrats are not 
intentionally stalling these security measures until after the Court 
has issued its rulings. This would be reprehensible.
  At the end of Pennsylvania Avenue, either President Biden or Attorney 
General Garland has apparently decided not to enforce Federal law. Like 
I explained on Monday, section 1507 of the Criminal Code makes it a 
crime right now to picket or parade with the intent of influencing a 
judge at locations that include a judge's residence. That is the law 
right now. People have been doing exactly that for days and days right 
now. But the Garland Justice Department is nowhere in sight.
  One would think a DOJ, run by the former chief judge of the DC 
Circuit, would need no prodding--no prodding--to protect judicial 
safety and judicial independence. But at least so far, the Attorney 
General was quicker to pounce on concerned parents at school board 
meetings.
  The Governors of Maryland and Virginia have had to write a joint 
letter to the Attorney General begging him to make his U.S. attorneys 
do their job and uphold the law.
  So, yesterday, I sent the DOJ my own letter asking the very same 
question. The Senate needs answers right now, and the Court needs 
security right now.