Democrats in Congress introduced legislation to transfer control of the U.S. Marshals Service from the Department of Justice to the federal judiciary, sparking debate over judicial independence and the separation of powers.
At a Glance
- Congressional Democrats have proposed legislation to move the U.S. Marshals Service from executive branch control to the federal judiciary
- The bill aims to protect judges from political interference and ensure consistent security amid increasing threats
- Supporters cite concerns about a potential constitutional crisis if Marshals face conflicting directives from different branches
- The legislation would create a special oversight board including the Chief Justice and Judicial Conference
- The proposal faces significant hurdles in a Republican-controlled Congress
Power Struggle Between Branches
A growing dispute between the executive and judicial branches has erupted over who should control courthouse security. Democratic lawmakers have introduced legislation that would transfer control of the U.S. Marshals Service from the Department of Justice to the federal judiciary. The bill responds to concerns about potential political interference in judicial security matters and aims to strengthen the independence of the federal court system during a time of heightened political tensions and increasing threats against judges.
“Today, independent judges must rely on the executive branch, whose cases are often in front of them, for personal security”, said Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif.
The legislation comes amid criticism from President Trump and other administration officials directed at judges who have ruled against them. Supporters of the bill argue this restructuring would insulate the U.S. Marshals Service from political pressures and ensure judges receive appropriate protection regardless of their rulings. Critics, however, view the proposal as an unnecessary disruption to a system that has functioned effectively for over two centuries.
Constitutional Concerns and Security Risks
Proponents of the legislation have highlighted potential constitutional problems under the current structure. Senator Cory Booker has emphasized the risk of a constitutional crisis arising from the Marshals’ dual accountability to both executive and judicial branches. At present, the Marshals could face contradictory directives if the White House or Justice Department instructed them to ignore court orders, creating an untenable position for the agency and threatening judicial independence.
“Since 1789, the U.S. Marshals have valiantly protected our nation’s judges and enforced court orders.”, said Sen. Booker.
The bill has gained support from judicial security advocates following several serious incidents targeting federal judges. These include the fatal shooting of Judge Esther Salas’s son and various intimidation tactics against other judges. Alex Aronson, executive director of Court Accountability, has endorsed the legislation as a reinforcement of constitutional checks and balances, arguing that the current structure creates unnecessary vulnerabilities in the judicial system.
Proposed Structure and Political Obstacles
The proposed legislation would establish a special oversight board that includes the Chief Justice and members of the Judicial Conference to supervise the U.S. Marshals Service. This arrangement would mirror the structure currently used for the U.S. Capitol Police. Democratic Representatives Eric Swalwell, Jamie Raskin, and Hank Johnson are sponsoring the bill in the House, while Senators Cory Booker, Chuck Schumer, Alex Padilla, and Adam Schiff are leading the effort in the Senate.
Despite support from Democratic lawmakers, the legislation faces significant challenges in the Republican-controlled Congress. The Justice Department has reportedly labeled the suggestion that U.S. Marshals might not protect judges as “absurd” and “wrong,” according to reports from the Washington Times. The debate reflects broader tensions between branches of government and raises fundamental questions about the proper balance of power in the American constitutional system.
