Supreme Court Funding Crisis: Justices to Lose Operating Funds Amid Shutdown, Shuttering Doors to Public
In the shadow of a deepening government shutdown now stretching into its 17th day, the U.S. Supreme Court stands on the brink of a financial cliff. By Saturday, October 18, the nation’s highest court will exhaust its reserves, forcing a closure to the public and sparking widespread alarm over the judiciary’s independence.
This unprecedented squeeze on Supreme Court funding, triggered by congressional gridlock, threatens to hobble federal courts nationwide. As lawmakers bicker over spending priorities, the fallout hits at the heart of American justice, delaying cases and furloughing staff in a system meant to stand above partisan fray. The shutdown, now the third-longest in U.S. history, underscores a perilous vulnerability: even the marble halls of the Supreme Court can’t escape the budget battles raging in Washington.
The crisis stems from a familiar tale of fiscal dysfunction. Congress failed to pass a stopgap funding bill by the October 1 deadline, halting appropriations for non-essential federal operations. The judiciary, funded through annual congressional allotments, has limped along on carryover balances from court fees and other non-appropriated sources. But those buffers are gone. Patricia McCabe, the Supreme Court’s public information officer, confirmed Friday that the court “expects to run out of funding on October 18.” Without fresh dollars, the building at One First Street will bar tourists, school groups, and casual visitors, remaining open only for official proceedings.
Essential functions won’t grind to a halt entirely. Justices will press on with oral arguments, opinion releases, and case processing, backed by minimal staff and constitutional protections ensuring their salaries endure. Police will secure the premises, and the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system—self-funded by user fees—will stay online for filings. Yet the ripple effects loom large. Non-essential employees face furloughs without pay, echoing the 1995-96 shutdown under President Clinton when court workers last endured such hardships.
Lower federal courts face an even tighter timeline. The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts announced that by Monday, October 20, the broader judiciary will lack funds for “full, paid operations.” District and appellate courts must now triage: Judges, shielded by Article III of the Constitution, continue serving unpaid if needed, but clerks, reporters, and defenders could clock out. Public defenders, already grappling with a July funding shortfall, warn of a “crisis” in representing indigent clients.
This isn’t uncharted territory, but the stakes feel higher in 2025. The last major shutdown in 2018-19 lasted 35 days, the longest ever, and drained court reserves faster than anticipated due to recent budget cuts. Back then, courts borrowed from future fees to stay afloat; today, tighter fiscal years mean less wiggle room. In districts like the Northern District of Illinois, Chief Judge Virginia M. Kendall decried the “pain” of delayed justice, as staff face suspended paychecks amid lawsuits challenging Trump administration moves, such as National Guard deployments in Chicago.
Public reaction has erupted online, blending outrage with dark humor. On X, users like @MeachamDr quipped, “Well I guess there’s a bright side to shutdowns,” suggesting Democrats tie Supreme Court funding to healthcare demands. Others, such as @Poppiolive, lambasted Republicans: “You control the House, Senate, and Supreme Court. Republicans own this shutdown.” Conservative voices, including @SpeakerJohnson, pinned blame on Democrats for ignoring President Trump’s pleas to avoid the chaos.
Experts echo the dismay. “The courts are supposed to remain open and independent,” legal analyst John Smith of the American Bar Association told reporters, warning that prolonged delays could backlog thousands of cases, from immigration appeals to civil rights suits. Elizabeth Wydra, president of the Constitutional Accountability Center, highlighted the irony: As the Supreme Court weighs high-stakes disputes over executive power and voting rights, its own operations teeter on congressional whim. “This shutdown exposes how fragile the separation of powers can be when funding becomes a weapon,” she said.
For everyday Americans, the Supreme Court funding crisis ripples far beyond D.C. landmarks. Tourists planning visits to the iconic building—drawing 1.5 million annually—face dashed hopes, hitting local economies in the shadow of the Capitol. More critically, in an era of polarized politics, delayed federal cases could stall deportations, contract disputes, and criminal trials, eroding trust in a system already strained by post-pandemic backlogs.
Small businesses awaiting rulings on regulatory challenges might wait months longer, squeezing cash flows in a shaky economy. Families relying on federal courts for custody battles or debt relief could see proceedings frozen, compounding personal hardships. Politically, it amplifies shutdown fatigue: With SNAP benefits at risk for 42 million recipients come November and military paydays in jeopardy, voters in swing states like Pennsylvania and Georgia may punish incumbents at the polls.
The impasse traces to deep divides over spending. Republicans, holding slim majorities in both chambers, passed a clean continuing resolution early in the shutdown, but Senate Democrats, led by Chuck Schumer, balked without concessions on issues like Obamacare sustainability. President Trump has urged a quick fix, blasting Democrats for “holding the country hostage.” Yet with the House adjourning until October 20 and no breakthrough in sight, the Senate’s next vote looms as a potential flashpoint.
As the clock ticks toward total exhaustion, the judiciary invokes the Anti-Deficiency Act, barring unpaid work beyond life-safety essentials. In Chicago, a pending suit over National Guard use—now appealed to the Supreme Court—highlights the timing’s cruel irony. If the shutdown drags into November, analysts predict a cascade: Furloughed probation officers risking public safety, unpaid defenders weakening Sixth Amendment rights, and a Supreme Court term derailed mid-stride.
This saga tests the resilience of America’s third branch. While justices deliberate in relative isolation, the funding drought lays bare a truth: No pillar of democracy is truly untouchable when dollars dry up.
By Sam Michael
Follow and subscribe to us to increase push notifications.
Supreme Court shutdown, government funding crisis, federal courts furlough, judiciary budget exhaustion, Anti-Deficiency Act violations