[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 15]
[House]
[Pages 21126-21127]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    EXTENDING AUTHORITY OF SUPREME COURT POLICE, MODIFYING VENUE OF 
   PROSECUTIONS RELATING TO SUPREME COURT BUILDING AND GROUNDS, AND 
     AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS TO UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the Senate bill (S. 2742) to extend certain authority of the Supreme 
Court Police, modify the venue of prosecutions relating to the Supreme 
Court building and grounds, and authorize the acceptance of gifts to 
the United States Supreme Court.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                S. 2742

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR THE UNITED STATES 
                   SUPREME COURT POLICE TO PROTECT COURT OFFICIALS 
                   OFF THE SUPREME COURT GROUNDS.

       Section 6121(b)(2) of title 40, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``2004'' and inserting ``2008''.

     SEC. 2. VENUE FOR PROSECUTIONS RELATING TO THE UNITED STATES 
                   SUPREME COURT BUILDING AND GROUNDS.

       Section 6137 of title 40, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
       ``(b) Venue and Procedure.--Prosecution for a violation 
     described in subsection (a) shall be in the United States 
     District Court for the District of Columbia or in the 
     Superior Court of the District of Columbia, on information by 
     the United States Attorney or an Assistant United States 
     Attorney.''.

     SEC. 3. GIFTS TO THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

       The Chief Justice or his designee is authorized to accept, 
     hold, administer, and utilize gifts and bequests of personal 
     property pertaining to the history of the United States 
     Supreme Court or its justices, but gifts or bequests of money 
     shall be covered into the Treasury.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Sensenbrenner).


                             General Leave

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend 
their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 2742, currently 
under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, S. 2742 contains three provisions that will benefit the 
administrative operations of the U.S. Supreme Court.
  First, the bill renews until 2008 authority provided under current 
law that allows the Supreme Court police to provide security for the 
Justices when they leave the Supreme Court premises. The Supreme Court 
police offer that protection, and without this extension, their 
services would be confined to the immediate area of the Court's 
grounds. In other words, they would not travel with the Justices when 
they vacation or speak out of the area, a responsibility that is 
imposed upon the Marshal's Service when necessary. The need for this 
protection is illustrated by the recent assault on Justice Souter near 
his home.
  Second, S. 2742 creates statutory authority for the Court to accept 
gifts. The scope of this text was narrowed with the Committee on the 
Judiciary's input and is now limited exclusively to gifts ``pertaining 
to the history of the Court or its Justices.'' The Court presently may 
accept gifts based on Comptroller General opinions.
  Third, this legislation empowers the U.S. District Court for the 
District of Columbia, along with the D.C. Superior Court, to adjudicate 
cases relating to crimes committed in the Supreme Court building and on 
Court grounds. Under current law, all cases are referred to the D.C. 
Superior Court. Because some of the crimes committed on Court grounds 
implicate first amendment rights, the Court and the Department of 
Justice believe that a Federal court will do a better job of promoting 
uniform results since it is more experienced in handling constitutional 
challenges.
  Mr. Speaker, the House Committee on the Judiciary, in a bipartisan 
fashion, worked with the Supreme Court and the other body to ensure 
that S. 2742 is devoid of controversy.
  These changes are important to the operation of the Court. I urge 
Members to support the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
might consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me also rise and thank the other body and thank the 
ranking member and the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary for 
legislation that I think is very important. I support the legislation 
introduced by Senator Hatch and cosponsored by Mr. Leahy from Vermont.
  The goals of this legislation are, namely, to extend to December 29, 
2008, the authority of the Marshal of the Supreme Court and the Supreme 
Court police to protect the Justices and official guests of the Court 
away from the court building and grounds; add the U.S. District Court 
to the District of Columbia to venue provisions governing prosecutions 
relating to the Supreme Court building and grounds, where venue now 
lies in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia; authorizes the 
Chief Justice to accept, hold, administer and use gifts of personal 
property to facilitate the work of the Supreme Court.
  As a general matter, I am an advocate of extending the discretion and 
jurisdiction of the Federal courts. In the midst of this House's 
consideration and passage of several measures that patently strip the 
jurisdiction of the courts and the discretion of the judges, it is 
refreshing that we see a piece of legislation pass that actually works 
to enhance the Court and its security.
  This legislation, S. 2742, is to add protection to the Supreme Court, 
and it would renew their authority to provide security for their 
Justices when they leave the Supreme Court and surrounding area.
  On May 1 of this year, Supreme Court Justice David Souter suffered 
minor injuries when a group of young men assaulted him when he jogged 
right in this vicinity. Other judges have had some experiences along 
those lines.
  Another provision in this legislation allows the Supreme Court to 
accept gifts ``pertaining to the history of the Supreme Court of the 
United States or its Justices.'' The Administrative Office of the 
Courts currently has statutory authority to accept gifts on behalf of 
the judiciary. This provision would grant the Supreme Court its own 
authority to accept gifts that would elevate or enhance its historical 
presence in this Nation. It would, of course, narrow the type of gift 
that can be received to historical items. This provision strikes the 
proper balance of maintaining the very favored place in history that 
the Supreme Court maintains, and then will improve the Court's overall 
function and administrative relief or issue and, as well, ensure the 
ethical considerations be made in order.
  Again, prosecution of offenses against the Court now were moved to 
the district court. I think that is an appropriate way of handling 
these matters, and I would ask in light of the fact that our Supreme 
Court, now more

[[Page 21127]]

than ever, is well-known to the American public, handling any number of 
controversial issues, I believe that S. 2742 is an appropriate 
legislative initiative to help us in the administration of justice.
  With that, I ask my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the legislation introduced by the 
Gentleman from Utah, Mr. Hatch on July 22, 2004 and co-sponsored by Mr. 
Leahy from Vermont. The goals of this legislation, namely to:
  Extend to December 29, 2008, the authority of the Marshall of the 
Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Police to protect the Justices and 
official guests of the court away from the court building and grounds;
  Add the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to venue 
provisions governing prosecutions relating to the Supreme Court 
building and grounds--where venue now lies in the Superior Court of the 
District of Columbia; and
  Authorizes the Chief Justice to accept, hold, administer, and use 
gifts and bequests of personal property to facilitate the work of the 
Supreme Court.
  As a general matter, I am an advocate of extending the discretion and 
jurisdiction of the federal courts. In the midst of this House's 
consideration and passage of several measures that patently strip the 
jurisdiction of the courts and the discretion of the judges, it is 
refreshing to see a piece of legislation pass that actually expands the 
reach of the court.
  The Gentlemen co-sponsored S. 2742 at the request of the Supreme 
Court. This legislation would renew their authority to provide security 
for their justices when the leave the Supreme Court.
  On May 1 of this year, Supreme Court Justice David Souter suffered 
minor injuries when a group of young men assaulted him as he jogged 
right in this vicinity. He is not the first justice to be injured in 
this manner. Justice Stephen Breyer was thrown from his bicycle several 
years ago and suffered minor injuries. These reports underscore the 
importance of off-campus security for Justices. If no congressional 
action is taken, the authority of Supreme Court police to protect its 
Justices off to court grounds will expire at the end of this year.
  Another provision in this legislation allows the Supreme Court to 
accept gifts ``pertaining to the history of the Supreme Court of the 
United States or its justices.'' The Administrative Office of the 
Courts currently has statutory authority to accept gifts on behalf of 
the judiciary. This provision would grant the Supreme Court its own 
authority to accept gifts but it would narrow the types of gifts that 
can received to historical items. This provision strikes the proper 
balance and will improve the courts's overall function.
  Finally, this legislation also would provide an additional venue for 
the prosecution of offenses that occur on the Supreme Court grounds. 
Currently, the DC Superior Court is the only place of proper venue 
despite the uniquely federal interest at stake. This legislation would 
allow suit to be brought in United States District Court in the 
District of Columbia.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in supporting this 
important legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 2742.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________