Hoyer: The Rule of Law Depends on a Judiciary that is Properly Funded

"Mr. Chairman, as you know, I think we must have such hearings ourselves. As it has been widely noted, this is the first time the Supreme Court justices are testifying before a House committee since 2019. We appreciate this opportunity. Such hearings used to be the norm. From 1960 to 2022, there were 93 appearances by at least one sitting Supreme Court Justice every year. This is a budget hearing to fulfill our duty to appropriate the people's taxes responsibly. I imagine that the questions will go beyond the fiscal to the fundamental, both are proper, in my view, but in the case of the court's essential independence, difficult.

"I want to begin this discussion today, though, on the budget by noting that the very real threats faced by our judiciary, which the Chairman has mentioned, is in our mind. According to the U.S. Marshal Service, more than 200 federal judges have had threats made against them in this Fiscal Year alone. With a deeply divided country and increasingly violent rhetoric being directed at judges, Congress must provide sufficient funding to ensure the safety of all judicial personnel. The FSGG bill already advanced by the Appropriations Committee, would provide $9.62 billion for the judiciary and $207 million for the Supreme Court itself. That's a 4.8% and 7.3% increase, respectively. Included in the bill is a $28.9 million increase for court security.

"At the same time, while we take measures to protect the physical safety of judges and court staff, Congress also has a responsibility to safeguard the independence of our judiciary and its ability to protect the constitutional rights of all Americans. Part of that is making certain that there is adequate funding for the public defenders, and I'm glad that we were able to address the budget shortfall for defenders serving in Fiscal Year 2026. In Fiscal [Year] 2027, the committee supported funding defender services at $1.79 billion, with an increase of $26 million over the last year. That is a constitutional responsibility both the courts and Congress have. The rule of law depends on a judiciary that is properly funded. Especially now when we need a strong judiciary to protect Americans from the imposition of a theory, in my view, of executive supremacy.

"This administration is routinely engaging in conducting the test the limits of our Constitution. We must remember that our Republic is a three-legged stool: the Congress, the Executive, the Judiciary. I believe that each branch must be held accountable by the other two as well as that each branch has a constitutional duty to protect the constitutionally-granted powers of the other two. The American people whom we represent expect the Supreme Court and all our federal courts to play its constitutional role as a transparent and neutral arbiter of the law. Just as we in Congress must do our duty to hold the executive and judicial branches accountable, so too must the Court carry out its responsibility to keep an overreaching executive or legislature in check without overreaching itself. At the same time, I believe the Court has a responsibility to guard against the executive subverting the article one powers of the Congress from usurpation by the executive. That was the Founders' genius, of separation of powers and the assurance of checks and balances. That is how America's judiciary maintains the trust of the people and prevents constitutional crises.

"As John Adams said, 'We are a nation of laws, not of men.' Maintaining the checks and balances to ensure that precept prevails remains the difficult but necessary job of each of the branches. In doing so, each branch will earn the structural deference our Founders intended and they believed, essential to perpetuate the democratic republic they so ably constructed. Justices, I thank you and your seven colleagues for the work that you do, and I look forward to this hearing and what you have to say today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman."