HB2724 would amend 18 U.S.C. §1507 to increase the penalty for obstruction of justice by picketing or parading in or near court buildings or residences of judges, jurors, witnesses, or other court officers. The bill swaps the current one-year sentence in the first undesignated paragraph with a five-year term, creating a higher ceiling for punishment.
As drafted, the measure is narrowly tailored to deter overt disruption around federal courts and protect the integrity of judicial proceedings.
In substance, the bill takes a single, targeted step: elevate consequences for obstructive demonstrations that interfere with courts or threaten court personnel. It does not introduce new offenses or alter procedures beyond the penalty adjustment, signaling a deterrence-oriented approach aimed at preserving court function and safety.
The bill’s focus remains on the most visible, disruptive conduct that courts, security services, and the public associate with the administration of justice.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill amends 18 U.S.C. §1507 by striking the word 'one year' in the first undesignated paragraph and inserting '5 years' as the maximum penalty for obstruction of justice by picketing or parading near court buildings or the residences of judges, jurors, witnesses, or other court officers.
Who It Affects
Directly affected are individuals who engage in or organize demonstrations in proximity to federal courthouses or the homes of court personnel. Federal judges, jurors, witnesses, and other court officers, along with U.S. Marshals and court security personnel, would see enhanced enforcement of the statute.
Why It Matters
The change elevates deterrence for disruption near the judiciary, reinforcing the security and integrity of high-stakes proceedings. It clarifies the consequences of attempting to intimidate or interfere with court operations and protects participants in the judicial process from overt obstruction.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill makes a focused change to the federal statute on obstruction of justice. It amends Section 1507 of Title 18 to increase the maximum penalty for blocking or interfering with court functions through picketing or parading near courts or the homes of judges, jurors, witnesses, and other court officers.
The amendment replaces the existing one-year limit with a five-year limit in the first undesignated paragraph of Section 1507, elevating the potential punishment for this kind of disruption.
Practically, this means prosecutors can seek longer sentences for demonstrators who physically assemble near court facilities or near the residences of people involved in the judiciary. The bill does not create new crimes or modify other penalties; it simply raises the ceiling on how long someone can be imprisoned for this specific form of obstruction.
The measure is narrowly tailored to address high-visibility disruption while leaving other provisions of the obstruction statute intact.If enacted, the bill would apply within the federal system and target the most disruptive demonstrations associated with courts and court personnel. It does not alter procedures, investigation methods, or standards for what constitutes obstruction beyond the absence of any other change in the law.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill increases the Section 1507 penalty from one year to five years for obstructing justice via picketing or parading near courts or court residences.
The prohibited conduct explicitly includes picketing or parading in or near court buildings or the residences of judges, jurors, witnesses, or other court officers.
The amendment targets only the first undesignated paragraph of Section 1507 and does not add new offenses.
No other sections of the obstruction statute or related procedures are modified by the bill.
The bill is titled the Protecting Our Supreme Court Justices Act of 2025 and applies to federal court settings.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
This section designates the act as the Protecting Our Supreme Court Justices Act of 2025. It provides the official, shareable title for referencing the measure in legal and policy discussions.
Obstruction of Justice by Picketing or Parading
This section amends 18 U.S.C. §1507 to increase the maximum penalty for obstructing justice by picketing or parading in or near court buildings or residences of judges, jurors, witnesses, or other court officers. The first undesignated paragraph, which previously used a one-year term, now specifies a five-year term. Practically, this raises the potential consequence for disruptive demonstrations in proximity to the judiciary and aims to deter interference with court operations.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Justice across all five countries.
Explore Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Judges and court staff gain a stronger deterrent against disruptive demonstrations that threaten safety or impede court operations, helping ensure smoother adjudication and security.
- Court security personnel and agencies (e.g., U.S. Marshals Service) obtain a clearer, enforceable penalty framework that supports protective measures around courthouses and judges’ residences.
- The broader judiciary and the public may experience increased confidence in the safety and integrity of the judicial process, as overt disruptions become more sanctionable.
Who Bears the Cost
- Protest organizers and participants who engage in demonstrations near courts may face longer potential imprisonment, increasing the cost of disruptive tactics.
- Courthouse neighbors and nearby communities could experience heightened security presence or restrictions tied to enforcement actions.
- Law enforcement and court personnel may need to allocate more time and resources to monitor, investigate, and prosecute offenses under this provision.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing robust judicial protection with First Amendment rights. Elevating penalties to deter disruption may reduce deterrence ambiguity but risks chilling lawful protest near courthouses and residences of court personnel if misapplied or overly broad in enforcement.
The bill’s targeted increase in penalties intensifies the consequences for a narrow set of disruptive acts tied to the judiciary. While it reinforces protection for courts and personnel, it also raises questions about the balance with First Amendment rights, particularly around demonstrations near sensitive government facilities.
Enforcement could be more resource-intensive, and there is potential for uneven application if demonstrations occur in contexts with strong public-interest advocacy.
Practically, the key implementation questions involve how prosecutors would prove obstruction in proximity scenarios, what constitutes “near” for purposes of Section 1507, and how this interacts with existing protest or trespass laws. Agencies will need clear guidance to avoid overreach while preserving the intended deterrent effect of the enhanced penalty.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.