DOJ official pressed on targeting of Supreme Court justices

The Justice Department’s top national security official indicated at a House hearing Thursday that prosecutors haven’t taken action against liberal activists seeking and posting information about the activities of Supreme Court justices and their families because such speech is protected by the First Amendment.

However, Assistant Attorney General for National Security Matthew Olsen said law enforcement will act against people making threats or seeking to engage in violence against justices, such as the alleged assassination attempt against Justice Brett Kavanaugh last month.

“Everyone who serves in a position of public trust — certainly, at the very top, the members of our Supreme Court, deserve to be safe and we have taken very seriously the threats of violence and violence,” Olsen told the House Judiciary Committee. “We are prosecuting an individual with attempted assassination of Justice [Brett] Kavanaugh. We have provided support and protection through the Marshals’ Service to the Supreme Court. We have supported legislation to increase that support.”

Following POLITICO’s publication in early May of a draft of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade and after the court’s ruling last month wiping out the federal right to abortion, protesters thronged and marched outside the homes of justices in Maryland and Virginia.

Those developments also seem to have triggered vandalism and threats aimed at so-called abortion resource centers run by anti-abortion activists. Olsen said some of those incidents have resulted in federal investigations.

“Violence — threats of violence, absolutely not acceptable,” the DOJ official said. “The FBI has opened a series of cases involving those attacks and threats against those resource centers — some of them opened as domestic violent extremism. So, this is not a partisan issue for the Justice Department.”

Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) pressed Olsen about some of the provocative activities by abortion-rights backers, including the posting of details about where Justice Amy Coney Barrett attends church and where her children attend school. He also noted that one group has offered cash bounties for timely tips on the locations of justices.

“Is that the kind of rhetoric that’s helpful when trying to avert abortion-related violent extremism?” Chabot asked.

“We look at acts of violence and threats of violence that violated the criminal law,” Olsen replied. “It is an unfortunate fact of our civic life that there is strong language, reprehensible language on both sides.”

However, the official said he had to be careful not to muddle the line between protected speech and threats that violate the law.

“I may personally find certain comments or statements reprehensible or not acceptable, but in my role at the National Security Division, we look at threats of violence and we prosecute those … It is one of our cherished protections that people can speak out under the First Amendment and do so in ways that, obviously, many people, if not most, don’t agree with. That’s part of what it means to be an American.”

“They’re putting a lot of lives in danger,” Chabot responded.

For several years, the body representing federal judges — the Judicial Council — has been pressing Congress to enact legislation to limit the publication of personal information online about federal judges and their families. However, free speech advocates have warned that some of the proposals could violate the First Amendment by discouraging or prohibiting details relevant to potential conflicts of interest for judges, like their property ownership and the work affiliations of their spouses.

Action on the measure in the Senate was blocked in 2020 and again in 2022 by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who insisted that the bill include similar protections for members of Congress.