Judges need better security, says Justice Department report

Carmel Sileo, Associate Editor

Two years after an angry litigant murdered federal district court judge Joan Lefkow’s mother and husband in Chicago, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has found that federal judges are still in danger and that courtroom security needs more improvement.

The report—released in October by the DOJ’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG)—is the follow-up to a 2004 report that urged implementation of stricter security measures in federal courtrooms. The new investigation looked into whether those measures were taken and how well they worked.

The short answer: Results have been mixed. While noting certain improvements among agencies that protect judges, the OIG found other efforts “languishing.”

For instance, the original report recommended that the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS), which is responsible for courtroom security, set up an Office of Protective Intelligence (OPI). The USMS did so, but it “was slow to staff the protective intelligence function and has not developed a strategy to effectively collect, analyze, and share information on potential threats against the judiciary.”

The report noted that at the time it was published, the USMS was nearing completion of a new Threat Management Center (TMC), which would house, analyze, and disseminate top-secret information and communicate with other intelligence agencies about threats to federal judges. The TMC opened in September 2007.

In 2005, after the Lefkow slayings, the Judicial Conference of the United States—which sets policy for the administration of federal courts—wrote to President Bush, asking for additional resources to help protect judges. The conference urged the president to direct the DOJ to fund several initiatives, such as installing home alarm systems for judges and enhancing the USMS Technical Operations Group.

The 2007 report noted that some of these steps have been taken. By July 2007, over 1,500 alarm systems had been installed in judges’ homes, and only a handful of judges did not have the systems yet; also, more than 60 percent of the judges said they were happy with the alarm systems.

But the report found that the USMS is not notified of alarm events at judges’ homes and has no way of monitoring or tracking them: “The USMS was unable to respond to the OIG’s request that it identify the number of alarm events which had occurred at judges’ residences . . . [because] it did not have an arrangement with the contractor to be notified of alarm events.”

And in 2006, the USMS convened a committee to review its Technical Operations Group (TOG), which coordinates electronic and air surveillance, tactical support, and analysis and intelligence. The report found that results were mixed here, too. While noting that “the USMS has provided some additional resources to the TOG,” the inspector general also found that the branch of the TOG that deals with judicial security had outdated equipment, insufficient staff, and other problems.

Threats against federal judges rose from 565 in 2002 to over 1,000 in 2006, the USMS reported.

Dick Carelli, a spokesman for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts in Washington, D.C., pointed to the new Threat Management Center as a positive sign. “The [USMS] really bears the brunt of responsibility and has been working diligently to amp up judicial security,” said Carelli.

The report, The United States Marshals Service Judicial Security Process, is available at www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/USMS/e0710/final.pdf.

Send your comments and questions about the online version of TRIAL to us at trial@justice.org

News & trends February 2008 | Volume 44, Issue 2

Judges need better security, says Justice Department report

Carmel Sileo, Associate Editor

News & trends
February 2008 | Volume 44, Issue 2