1. United States
2. Del.
3. Letter

I appreciate the need for Supreme Court security; and their request for significant additional funding - but we must also be circumspect - the court is out of step with the American people, and apparently the constitution, if recent decisions are to be used as evidence. Why should we provide additional funding to secure a group that is making decisions out of step with reality? It seems that the court might need to be adjusted in other ways before additional funding is provided. For example: guarantee transparency; remove conflicts of interest. Make the court comply with ethics regulations. Clarence Thomas is an amazing example of a powerful man who has abused his privilege extensively. Why should we provide additional millions in funding to secure people who are violating our trust? I think not.