April 26, 2006: Norton Letter to Supreme Court Chief Justice

Norton Letter to Supreme Court Chief Justice Seeks Alternative to Court’s Security Proposal that Exposes Capitol Hill Residents to Truck Bomb Blasts
April 26, 2006

Washington, DC- Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) today wrote Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts asking that he delay efforts to erect security barriers to protect the Court that guarantees that nearby homes and families, instead, would receive the full force of a truck bomb blast. Norton, a member of the Homeland Security Committee, said that she and government security experts, with whom she is currently consulting, have ideas that could satisfy all concerned. The Congresswoman wrote that she did not believe that the Chief Justice was fully aware of the details or that, “the Court or any law enforcement body would sanction the trade-off of Court for resident security or the reverse.”

Norton’s full letter follows.

April 26, 2006

Chief Justice John Roberts
U.S. Supreme Court Building

Dear Chief Justice Roberts:

I write because I cannot believe that you are fully aware of proposals to protect the security of the Supreme Court building by assuring that nearby homes and families would receive the effects of any truck bomb blast. I do not believe that anyone, and certainly not the Court or any law enforcement body, would sanction such a trade-off. I regret that such a proposal on its face was not immediately regarded as unacceptable, sending security officials back to the drawing board in search of more acceptable advice, deeper and more analytical thinking, and if need be, additional expert advice.

My constituents, who are neighbors of the Court, and I have had good meetings with the Marshal. I very much appreciate the time she has spent with residents and with me and her considerable efforts to reach an acceptable solution. She needs further professional assistance, and I am engaged in discussions with government experts concerning such assistance.

My concern for the security of the Court and of residents, employees, visitors and official Washington alike is informed by my own professional work as a member of the Homeland Security Committee. I consider it my duty to help find a way to further the security of the Court. At the same time, no one could ask me or any other public official to sacrifice American citizens in the process.

In my years of working with security officials, I have found that acceptable solutions almost always are difficult to achieve, but by keeping at it we usually have been able to avoid zero-sum game solutions. I suggested a common sense solution when the Marshal visited me, but she rejected this idea in a letter of April 17th with reasons involving logistical matters which I believe could be solved, but we have had no opportunity to meet with her to respond to the issues she raised. In any case, that idea simply came out of one meeting but does not by any means exhaust the well of ideas. There are a number of other solutions I have in mind and am currently discussing with experts. I also have spoken with residents and indicated to them that I believe they must be prepared to compromise further.

I regret having to write you personally. However, because I am informed, surprisingly, that the justices will make the final decision, I must ask that you intervene to delay any effort to move forward until I have had an opportunity to complete the consultations with government security officials in which I am now engaged. There is no present security emergency for the Court or for the District, and all the parties involved deserve a mutually satisfactory resolution.

Sincerely,

Eleanor Holmes Norton