Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett recently revealed she had to wear a bulletproof vest following a violent threat from a Jan. 6 defendant.

The threat, made by Bradley Scott Nelson, came after Barrett dissented in a key Supreme Court ruling that impacted hundreds of Capitol demonstration cases, and the justice has now offered her recollections of the danger she faced, as Newsweek reports.

Barrett's dissent in the case angered Nelson, who allegedly posted on social media calling for violence against her.

The case in question, Fischer v. U.S., addressed how federal obstruction laws could potentially be applied to those involved in the Jan. 6 events, including supporters of former President Donald Trump.

Nelson's Threats Spark Security Measures

The Supreme Court case, decided in June by a 6-3 majority, saw Barrett joining Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan in dissent. Barrett argued that actions that obstruct Congress, such as delaying its session, should count as obstruction of justice, regardless of whether any documents were destroyed. Nelson, a defendant in the January 6 riot, allegedly took to social media after Barrett's dissent, posting violent threats.

According to a Maryland judge, Nelson suggested someone should "cut Coney Barrett’s throat from ear to ear." In response, law enforcement advised Barrett to wear a bulletproof vest for protection.

Barrett Discusses Personal Impact of the Threat

Barrett shared her experience during a conversation at the Tenth Circuit’s judicial conference in Colorado Springs. During the discussion, she revealed that her 13-year-old son found the bulletproof vest intriguing, asking, "That’s so cool! Can I try it on?" Despite the gravity of the threat, Barrett noted how her seven children have adjusted to her role as a Supreme Court justice. However, she acknowledged that traveling with U.S. Marshals has added challenges to her family life.

The threat against Barrett came after a series of troubling actions by Nelson. He had already threatened FBI agents investigating his case, becoming so verbally aggressive that U.S. Marshals had to escort one of the agents to their vehicle for safety.

January 6 Defendant Charged with Multiple Offenses

Nelson, who pleaded not guilty to charges related to the Jan. 6 Capitol unrest, faces several accusations, including entering a restricted building and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds. His case escalated when he posted videos online, making threats against FBI agents. These threats, combined with his social media post targeting Barrett, led to the revocation of his bail by Judge Charles Austin on Aug. 6.

Nelson’s history of threats and aggressive behavior had already drawn attention from authorities. Judge Austin pointed to Nelson’s alarming online activity, writing that his social media posts indicated a serious threat to public safety. He further noted that Nelson’s combative behavior toward law enforcement had escalated to the point where security measures had to be taken during his interactions with FBI agents.

Barrett’s Judicial Role Under Scrutiny

Barrett’s involvement in the Fischer v. U.S. case highlights the ongoing debates surrounding how prosecutors handle cases involving Jan. 6 defendants. The ruling limited the government’s ability to charge these defendants under federal obstruction laws, a decision that Barrett and the other dissenting justices opposed. In her dissent, Barrett argued that disrupting Congress should be enough to qualify as obstruction, even if no physical documents were affected.

Barrett’s stance in the case, which ultimately did not prevail, became a flashpoint for individuals like Nelson, who saw her position as threatening to their legal defense. As a result, the dissenting opinion sparked personal risks for Barrett, leading to increased security measures.

Barrett Maintains Focus on Judicial Responsibilities

Despite the threats against her, Barrett remains focused on her role as a Supreme Court justice. Speaking at the Colorado Springs conference, she emphasized that her family has been supportive and understanding of the pressures that come with her position.

Barrett also reflected on the unique challenges of balancing her judicial responsibilities with her personal life, noting that her children have adapted to the increased security presence.

Nelson’s legal troubles, stemming from his involvement in the Jan. 6 demonstrations, continue to unfold. While he pleaded not guilty to the charges, his repeated threats have put him under intense scrutiny, particularly after his comments targeting Barrett.

Authorities Respond to Nelson's Threats

In light of Nelson’s actions, U.S. law enforcement has taken significant steps to ensure the safety of those involved in the case.

Judge Austin’s decision to revoke Nelson’s bail was based on the seriousness of his threats and his history of confrontational behavior toward federal agents.

Authorities continue to monitor Nelson’s case closely, particularly as it involves potential threats to public officials like Barrett.