[House Report 106-931]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 106-931
======================================================================
THE SUPREME COURT SECURITY ACT OF 2000
_______
October 4, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. McCollum, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 5136]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 5136) to make permanent the authority of the Marshal
of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Police to provide
security beyond the Supreme Court building and grounds, having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon without
amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary........................................ 1
Background and Need for the Legislation.................... 2
Committee Consideration.................................... 2
Vote of the Committee...................................... 2
Committee Oversight Findings............................... 3
Committee on Government Reform Findings.................... 3
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures.................. 3
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate.................. 3
Constitutional Authority Statement......................... 4
Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion................. 4
Agency Views............................................... 4
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported...... 5
Purpose and Summary
H.R. 5136 would make permanent the current temporary
statutory authority of the Marshal of the Supreme Court and the
Supreme Court Police to provide security beyond the Supreme
Court building and its grounds to Supreme Court Justices, Court
personnel, and official guests of the Court. The current
authority to provide this security will terminate on December
29, 2000. H.R. 5136 would also eliminate the Court's annual
reporting requirement to Congress detailing the administrative
cost associated with providing off-grounds security. This cost
has been very modest in the past and is fully detailed each
year in the Court's annual budget request to Congress. Finally,
H.R. 5136 would repeal the ministerial requirement that the
Chief Justice authorize in writing armed protection for
official guests of the Supreme Court when they are traveling in
the United States outside the Washington, D.C. metropolitan
area.
Background and Need for the Legislation
The Supreme Court Police is charged with enforcing the law
at the Supreme Court building and its grounds as well as
protecting Justices and other Court employees on and off its
grounds.\1\ Since 1982, Congress has provided statutory
authority for the Supreme Court Police to provide security
beyond the Court building and grounds for Justices, Court
employees, and official visitors of the Court. This same
authority requires that the Supreme Court annually report to
Congress on the cost of such security. Since 1986, Congress has
extended this off-grounds authority to provide security four
times, but the current authority will sunset on December 29,
2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 40 U.S.C. Sec. 13 et. seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The current authority and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
Police are essential to the force's performance of its everyday
duties. Supreme Court Police regularly provide security to
Justices by transporting and accompanying them to official
functions in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, and
occasionally outside it when they, or official guests of the
Court, are traveling on Court business. Some Justices, because
of threats to their personal safety, are driven by the police
to and from their homes and the Court every day. Additionally,
the police protect Court employees going to and from its
parking lot, which is located one-half block east of the
Supreme Court building and off the grounds of the Court.
The committee believes that the Supreme Court Police should
continue to provide off-ground security to protect the
Justices, other Court personnel and the Court's official
guests. Given the fact that the Court's police force is well
trained and has an excellent performance record, it is
appropriate that this authority be made permanent at this time.
Committee Consideration
On September 20, 2000, the Committee on the Judiciary met
in open session and ordered reported favorably the bill H.R.
5136 by voice vote, a quorum being present.
Vote of the Committee
No recorded votes on the bill, H.R. 5136, were taken in the
committee.
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the committee reports that the
findings and recommendations of the committee, based in
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the
descriptive portions of this report.
Committee on Government Reform Findings
No findings or recommendations of the Committee on
Government Reform and Oversight were received as referred to in
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Clause 3(c)(2) of House Rule XIII is inapplicable because
this legislation does not provide new budgetary authority or
increased tax expenditures.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the committee sets forth, with
respect to the bill H.R. 5136, the following estimate and
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, September 28, 2000.
Hon. Henry J. Hyde, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5136, a bill to
make permanent the authority of the Marshal of the Supreme
Court and the Supreme Court Police to provide security beyond
the Supreme Court building and grounds.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Lanette J.
Keith, who can be reached at 226-2860.
Sincerely,
Dan L. Crippen, Director.
Enclosure
cc:
Honorable John Conyers Jr.
Ranking Democratic Member
H.R. 5136--A bill to make permanent the authority of the Marshal of the
Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Police to provide security
beyond the Supreme Court building and grounds.
H.R. 5136 would authorize the Marshal of the Supreme Court
and the Supreme Court Police to provide security beyond the
Supreme Court building and grounds for Justices, employees of
the court, and official visitors. Based on information from the
Supreme Court, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 5136 would
cost less than $10,000 a year over the five-year period to pay
for personnel and transportation expenses, subject to the
availability of appropriated funds.
H.R. 5136 would have no effect on direct spending or
receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
H.R. 5136 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would not affect state, local, or tribal governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Lanette J.
Keith, who can be reached at 226-2860. This estimate was
approved by Robert A. Sunshine, Assistant Director for Budget
Analysis.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, the committee finds the authority for this
legislation in Article I, section 8, clause 18 of the
Constitution.
Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion
Sec. 1. Making Permanent Certain Policing Authority.
Section 1 repeals subsection (c) of 40 U.S.C. Sec. 13n,
which provides that the authority of the Marshal of the Supreme
Court and the Supreme Court Police to provide security beyond
the Supreme building and grounds to Supreme Court Justices
pursuant to 40 U.S.C. Sec. 13n(a)(2) will expire on December
29, 2000. Additionally, repealing subsection (c) will also
eliminate the requirement that the Marshal of the Supreme Court
annually report to Congress regarding the administrative cost
providing off-grounds security for Justices, other Court
personnel, and official guests of the Court. Finally, this
section would repeal the ministerial requirement that the Chief
Justice of the United States or an Associate Justice of the
Supreme Court authorize in writing armed protection for
official guests of the Court when they are traveling in the
United States but outside the Washington, D.C. metropolitan
area.
Agency Views
Supreme Court of
the United States,
Washington, DC, June 30, 2000.
Hon. Henry J. Hyde, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Congressman Hyde: Since 1982, Congress has recognized
the authority of the Supreme Court Police to provide security
beyond the Court building and grounds for Justices, Court
employees, and official visitors. The authority, codified at 40
U.S.C. Sec. 13n, requires that the Supreme Court annually
inform Congress of the cost of such security and contains a
sunset clause. Last amended in 1996, this clause provides that
the authority will automatically terminate on December 29,
2000.
As security concerns have not diminished, it is essential
that the off-grounds authority of the Supreme Court Police be
continued without interruption. Accordingly, I request your
support for legislation to repeal the sunset provision, and to
permanently authorize the off-grounds authority of the Supreme
Court Police.
If you have any questions or would like additional
information, please contact Jane E. Petkofsky, Supreme Court
Counsel, at 479-3282 or Marshal of the Court, Dale Bosley, at
479-3333.
Sincerely,
William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change
is proposed is shown in roman):
SECTION 9 OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 18, 1949
CHAP. 479.--An Act relating to the policing of the building and grounds
of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Sec. 9. (a) * * *
(b) The Metropolitan police force of the District of
Columbia [are hereby authorized] is authorized to make arrests
within the Supreme Court Building and grounds for any
violations of any such laws or regulations, but such authority
shall not be construed as authorizing the Metropolitan Police
force, except with the consent or upon the request of the
Marshal of the Supreme Court or his assistants, to enter the
Supreme Court Building to make arrests in response to
complaints or to serve warrants or to patrol the Supreme Court
Building or grounds.
[(c) The authority created under subsection (a)(2) shall
expire on December 29, 2000. The Marshal of the Supreme Court
shall report annually to the Congress on March 1 regarding the
administrative cost of carrying out his duties under such
subsection. Duties under subsection (a)(2)(A) of this section
with respect to an official guest of the Supreme Court in any
part of the United States (other than the District of Columbia,
Maryland, and Virginia) shall be authorized in writing by the
Chief Justice of the United States or an Associate Justice of
the Supreme Court, if such duties require the carrying of
firearms under subsection (a)(5) of this section.]
[(d)] (c) As used in this Act, the term--
(1) ``official guest of the Supreme Court'' means
an individual who is a guest of the Supreme Court, as
determined by the Chief Justice of the United States or
any Associate Justice of the Supreme Court;
(2) ``State'' means a State of the United States,
the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, and any territory or possession of the United
States; and
(3) ``United States'', when used in a geographical
sense, means the several States, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any
territory or possession of the United States.