On Thursday, March 13, 2025, NPR published an article detailing the alarming rise in threats faced by federal judges who have ruled against the Trump administration. These threats have raised serious concerns regarding the safety of judges and the independence of the judiciary.

The article highlights specific incidents, such as the bomb threat received by the sister of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Lower court judges who have paused certain actions by President Trump, including efforts to dismantle federal agencies, have been targeted on social media. Some Republican lawmakers associated with the president have even suggested impeachment proceedings against these judges, who are appointed for life.

Elon Musk, who is currently overseeing the Department of Government Efficiency, has also contributed to the threats against judges. He has made repeated posts on social media advocating for the impeachment of judges who delay or block aspects of Trump’s agenda. These actions come amid broader efforts by the Trump administration to fire lawyers within the Justice Department and the Pentagon, as well as to penalize private law firms representing clients unfavorable to Trump.

Judge Richard Sullivan of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit emphasized the seriousness of the situation during a news conference, recounting that four federal judges have been killed in retaliation for their judicial roles throughout his lifetime. He stressed the importance of ensuring that such violence does not occur again.

The Federal Judges Association, representing over 1,000 judges nationwide, has expressed its concern, stating that the judiciary plays a crucial role in preserving democracy. The group asserted that judges must be able to perform their duties without the fear of violence or undue influence.

Legal experts noted that the current attacks on judges are occurring at an early stage in the legal process, often before the Supreme Court has the opportunity to provide a final ruling. Judge Jeffrey Sutton, chief judge of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, remarked that the system of justice allows for appeals and that impeachment should not be used to circumvent this process. Historically, only 15 federal judges have faced impeachment, primarily for serious allegations such as bribery or corruption.

Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University, commented on the low probability of successful judicial impeachment, emphasizing that it would require a two-thirds vote from the Senate to remove a judge from the bench. He cautioned that normalizing attacks on judges for merely ruling against the federal government poses significant threats to judicial independence.

Paul Grimm, a former federal judge with 26 years of experience, warned that even the mere threat of impeachment can lead to intimidation of judges. He stated that attempts to intimidate judges undermine the rule of law, which is essential for protecting American liberties and rights. He also expressed concern over online threats that disclose personal information about judges and their families, highlighting the dangers posed by such actions.

The article further notes several violent incidents involving judges, including the tragic case of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas, whose son was killed by an angry litigant nearly five years ago. In 2022, a man attempted to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh but was deterred by security measures. Additionally, a state court judge in Maryland was shot and killed in 2023.

According to the U.S. Marshals, threats against federal judges have doubled in recent years, affecting both Democratic and Republican judges alike. Justice Barrett recently faced backlash from right-wing commentators after she sided with Chief Justice John Roberts and the liberal justices against Trump’s attempt to halt foreign aid.

While the U.S. Marshals are responsible for protecting judges, their reporting structure links them to the U.S. attorney general rather than the courts. This connection has raised concerns among some members of Congress, including Rep. Eric Swalwell from California. He warned that a president unhappy with a judge’s decision could theoretically withdraw their security detail.

The Trump administration had previously removed protection from former military and national security officials who disagreed with the president during his first term. Swalwell suggested that Congress should consider establishing an independent security force for judges, separate from the White House, to ensure their safety.

As the threats against judges escalate, the article emphasizes the critical need to protect judicial independence and the safety of those serving in the judiciary. The situation underscores the broader implications for the rule of law and the functioning of democracy in the United States.

 

 

Source: NPR