Newly disclosed documents from the U.S. Marshals Service appear to show confusion and a lack of coordination after the death of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in West Texas in February 2016.

“It was a weekend morning, and in a remote part of Texas, and it took several hours for the right people to be notified,” said Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, who sought and sued for the documents under the Freedom of Information Act.

By statute and according to policy directives included in the released documents, the Marshals Service is tasked with protecting justices during domestic travel outside the Washington area “when requested.”

Part of the problem surrounding Scalia's death, the documents reveal, was that Scalia chose not to have federal protection while at the Cibolo Creek Ranch, the hunting resort where he died.

Scalia only requested help from the marshal's service while changing planes in Houston from a Southwest Airlines flight to a private charter plane, where he joined six other unnamed people for the flight to the ranch, according to the documents.

The 380 pages of documents, many of them heavily redacted, fill in some details of Scalia's trip to Texas, which came just a few days after returning from a trip to Hong Kong and Singapore.

In a Feb. 9 email, an unnamed person at the court said “originally, we did not think he would need anything from the marshals” for the Texas trip. But the email went on to ask for protection during Scalia's flight transfer and layover in Houston. The email added, “He will be traveling with a gun.”

The documents also include a detailed timeline of the Saturday morning when Scalia was found dead in his room at 11 a.m. at the ranch by a housekeeper. Soon after, an unnamed person tried to reach federal authorities, “with no response.” Apparently, that first message said someone in Scalia's party had died, not Scalia himself.

At 12:41 p.m., the local sheriff notified the nearest marshal's service office, and word began to spread within federal law enforcement agencies, including the Supreme Court police. At 2:38 p.m., the first of many officers from the marshal's service arrived at the ranch. At 10 p.m., they took inventory of Scalia's effects in the room and ultimately put them in a marshal's service safe.

One email exchange seems to reflect concern that the Marshals Service would get in trouble for not being with Scalia at the ranch.

A Feb. 14 Washington Post article circulated to officials included a statement from the service stating that Scalia had declined protection and that deputy U.S. marshals from West Texas “responded immediately upon notification of Justice Scalia's passing.” One official of the service said the statement was “relatively good,” adding “Let's hope it doesn't grow legs.”

“The public should be confident that Supreme Court justices are well-protected, both inside their building and when they venture out into the world,” Roth said. “That the justices can decline protection when they travel to the most far-flung places in the country does not seem appropriate, given the expansive reach and resources of the U.S. Marshals Service, and the fact that so many justices choose to remain on the bench well into old age.”