Threats to federal judges rose 50%. Their protection detail didn't.
Summary
Hostile communications against the federal judiciary jumped more than 50% in fiscal 2025 — 564 confirmed threats to specific judges. The Marshals Service still runs judicial security on the same headcount it had two years ago, and is only now asking Congress for 78 more people to catch up.
Follow the dollar
The U.S. Marshals Service runs judicial protection — protective investigations, executive-protection details, threat assessments — out of its own Salaries and Expenses budget, in a line item called Judicial and Courthouse Security. For fiscal years 2025 and 2026, Congress funded that line at the same staffing level both years: 1,866 positions, 1,817 full-time-equivalent employees, per the USMS FY2027 Performance Budget. Only in its FY2027 request — submitted to Congress in April 2026 and not yet appropriated — does USMS finally ask for more: 237 new positions, 118 more , built around a $34,682,700 "Judicial Security: Protective Operations" program increase.
View data as table
| Executive protection | $22.90M | 60 new Deputy U.S. Marshals |
|---|---|---|
| Field operations | $6.15M | 15 DUSMs + 3 program analysts |
| Special assignments | $3.20M | travel, overtime, guard wages |
| Light armored vehicles | $1.65M | fleet replacement |
| Protective services training | $0.65M | district-level training |
| Counter-surveillance ops | $0.14M | detection missions |
Most of the ask — $22.9 million — is 60 new Deputy U.S. Marshals for executive protection. The agency's own justification explains why: over "the last few years," USMS protective details have gone from one or two full-time details a year to between five and nine, and a fully staffed detail requires 20 deputy marshals. Running five to nine of those on a staff sized for one or two means the agency, in its own words, "must pull individuals from other mission areas repeatedly," which it says creates "officer safety issues." That's not a critic's assessment — it's the line item's own justification to Congress.
A second, separate account — the judiciary's Court Security appropriation, which pays for contract courthouse guards and security hardware rather than deputy marshals — has grown faster on paper: from $750.163 million enacted in FY2025 to $892.032 million enacted in FY2026, an 18.9% jump, with a further $920.929 million requested for FY2027. But the headcount behind that money — contract Court Security Officer positions — moved from 4,746.5 in FY2025 to 4,784.5 in FY2026, and the FY2027 request keeps that number exactly flat at 4,784.5. Bigger checks, same guards.
The same system, counted in people
View data as table
| FY 2025 Enacted | 1,817 FTE | 1,866 authorized positions |
|---|---|---|
| FY 2026 Enacted | 1,817 FTE | 1,866 authorized positions |
| FY 2027 Request | 1,935 FTE | 2,103 authorized positions, pending |
Staffing sat still for two straight budget cycles while the threat picture worsened. As of March 2026, USMS statistics show hostile communications directed at the judiciary increased by more than 50% in fiscal year 2025: 808 incidents were flagged as potential threats, violence, or danger to federal judges, and 564 were confirmed as threats to specific judges after investigation — up from 509 the year before. None of that is in dispute between the judiciary and the Justice Department; both cite the same USMS numbers in their own budget requests. What's in dispute is timing: the threats are already logged in FY2025. The people to answer them are a FY2027 request that Congress has not yet funded, meaning the earliest possible staffing relief lands at least two full fiscal years after the spike that justified it.
The takeaway
- The threat count moved first, by a lot. Hostile communications against federal judges rose more than 50% in FY2025 — 564 confirmed threats to specific judges, out of 808 flagged incidents.
- The staffing count didn't move at all. Judicial and Courthouse Security was identical in FY2025 and FY2026 — 1,817 — even as USMS ran three to four times as many protective details as "a few years" earlier.
- The fix is a request, not a fact. The $34.7 million, 78-position increase that would raise staffing to 1,935 is a FY2027 ask submitted in April 2026 — Congress has not appropriated it, and USMS's own justification says current staff are already being "pulled from other mission areas repeatedly" to cover the gap.
Figures cover two distinct federal accounts — USMS's own Salaries and Expenses budget for deputy marshals, and the judiciary's separate Court Security appropriation for contract guards and hardware — cited separately throughout. FY2027 figures for both accounts are requests as of this writing, not enacted appropriations.
Sources
- U.S. Marshals Service, 2027 Performance Budget — Salaries and Expenses Appropriation (President's Budget, April 2026) — the $34,682,700 / 78-position protective-operations request, its six line items, and the Judicial and Courthouse Security staffing table (1,817 FY2025–FY2026, 1,935 requested for FY2027). justice.gov
- Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Court Security, FY2027 Congressional Budget Summary — the Court Security Program Summary table (CSO wages, Federal Protective Service charges, systems and equipment, program administration by fiscal year), the FY2025–FY2027 appropriation totals ($750.163M / $892.032M / $920.929M requested), and USMS's fiscal-2025 threat statistics (808 incidents, 564 confirmed threats, +50% hostile communications). uscourts.gov
- Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, reproducing the Administrative Office's FY2026 Court Security congressional budget testimony — the FY2025 Court Security Program Summary table used to source the FY2025 CSO staffing figure (4,746.5 ). citizensforethics.org
- Bloomberg Law, "US Marshals Tell Congress More Money is 'Vital' as Threats Rise" — reporting on the USMS FY2027 budget request, corroborating the 564-threats and $2.18 billion total USMS budget figures against the primary documents above. news.bloomberglaw.com
Comments
Always open. Logged-in readers can annotate paragraphs in place.
Two federal budgets protect a federal judge: one buys the guards and the cameras, the other pays the deputy marshals who run threat investigations and protective details. Both accounts agree on one thing — the threats are up sharply. Only one of them has actually added people to answer that, and as of mid-2026 it exists only as a request Congress hasn't funded yet.