The History of Public Access and Tours of the Supreme Court Building

by

The Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C., is not only a symbol of justice but also a place where the public can connect with the American legal system. Over the years, access to the building and its tours have evolved significantly, reflecting changes in security, public interest, and educational priorities.

Early History of Public Access

When the Supreme Court first moved into its building in 1935, public access was relatively open. Visitors could walk into the building during designated hours, observe oral arguments, and explore the public areas. This openness aimed to foster transparency and public understanding of the judicial process.

Development of Tours and Educational Programs

In the decades following its opening, the Court began offering organized tours, often led by court staff or volunteers. These tours included visits to the courtroom, the library, and exhibits about the Court’s history. Schools and educational groups frequently participated, making the Court a key part of civic education.

Security Measures and Restrictions

After significant events such as the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan in 1981, security measures at the Court increased. Access became more controlled, with stricter screening processes and limited tour hours. Public visits were still allowed but under tighter security protocols to protect visitors and staff.

Modern Public Access and Virtual Tours

Today, the Supreme Court continues to welcome visitors, but with enhanced security. In addition to in-person tours, the Court offers virtual tours and educational resources online, making its history and functions accessible to a global audience. Special programs and live-streamed oral arguments also help demystify the Court’s work for the public.

Future of Public Access

Looking ahead, the Court aims to balance security with openness. Initiatives to improve educational outreach and digital accessibility are expected to expand, ensuring that the public can continue to learn about the judiciary while maintaining safety and security.