Threats to US Federal Judges Who Opposed Trump Tick Up
A disturbing trend is emerging in the United States as federal judges who have ruled against former President Donald Trump face a growing wave of threats and intimidation. These incidents range from menacing voicemails to coordinated harassment tactics, highlighting a concerning escalation in attacks against the judiciary.
According to recent reports, judges who have opposed Trump’s administration in court are experiencing a sharp increase in threats directed at them and their families. These incidents have raised alarms about the safety of the judiciary and the potential undermining of judicial independence.
The Nature and Rise of Threats
One notable example is Judge Jack McConnell, chief judge for the District of Rhode Island. After blocking a Trump policy action earlier this year, his court received over 400 threatening voicemails, including credible death threats. One threat even referenced a “Smith & Wesson visit,” prompting an investigation by the U.S. Marshals.
Federal marshals have identified protecting judges as a top priority, as they track threats against dozens of judges, most of whom have ruled unfavorably against Trump’s administration. This surge in threats has left many in the legal community on high alert.
Doxxing and Harassment
Judge Esther Salas of New Jersey has also spoken out about the new forms of harassment judges are facing. Over 100 “pizza doxings”—where unwanted pizza deliveries are sent to judges’ homes—have been reported since last year, with a sharp rise in 2025.
Salas emphasized that these are not random pranks but rather “a targeted, concentrated, coordinated attack on judges.” She also pointed out the lack of public condemnation from Washington for these attacks, raising questions about the broader implications for judicial safety.
Political Rhetoric and Undermining Judicial Independence
While both Democratic- and Republican-appointed judges have been targeted, many point to rhetoric from Trump and his allies as a key driver of the recent uptick in threats. Trump has frequently denounced individual judges by name on social media, labeling them “sick” or “dangerous,” and his allies have called for their impeachment or simply disregarding adverse court rulings.
Such public discrediting, according to Salas, “invites people to do us harm” and undermines judicial independence. Some lawmakers have even displayed “wanted” posters of judges who ruled unfavorably against the Trump administration outside their congressional offices, further fueling the hostile environment.
Impact on the Judiciary
These threats have a chilling effect not just on the safety of judges and their families but also on the independence and functioning of the judiciary as a whole. Judges and judicial associations warn that attacks can compromise the ability of the courts to operate free from fear or political influence.
According to the Federal Judges Association, “Judges must be able to do their jobs without fear of violence or undue influence.” Some judges are hesitant to speak out, concerned that doing so could invite formal complaints or further harassment, making it difficult to address the threats surgically and publicly.
Universal Concern Across Political Affiliations
Importantly, the intimidation tactics and threats have targeted appointees from both parties. Judge Lasnik noted that judges from both Democratic and Republican backgrounds are deeply concerned, yet many hesitate to draw attention to the issue publicly out of fear of reprisal or appearing partisan.
In Summary
The increase in threats against US federal judges who have ruled against Trump represents a significant threat to both their personal safety and the independence of the judiciary. These actions are widely seen as part of a broader attempt to undermine public trust and intimidate judges into compliance, with consequences for the rule of law and democratic governance in the United States.
The Broader Implications of the Threats
The surge in threats against federal judges who have opposed Trump has far-reaching implications for the judicial system and democratic governance. These incidents are not isolated but rather part of a pattern that reflects a broader erosion of respect for the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary.
Coordinated Tactics and Their Impact
Beyond the menacing voicemails and death threats, the rise of coordinated harassment tactics, such as “pizza doxing,” signifies a new level of sophistication in these attacks. These tactics are designed to cause disruption and fear, extending beyond the judges themselves to their families and personal lives. The coordinated nature of these incidents suggests an organized effort, rather than isolated acts, further amplifying their intimidating effect.
The Role of Political Rhetoric in Endangering Judges
Trump’s rhetoric has been particularly damaging, as it not only targets individual judges but also undermines the public’s perception of the judiciary as a whole. By labeling judges as “sick” or “dangerous,” Trump and his allies create an environment where judges become vulnerable to public hostility. This rhetoric, combined with calls for impeachment or disregard of court rulings, emboldens those who seek to intimidate judges and their families.
Judicial Morale and the Independence of the Bench
The psychological toll of these threats on judges should not be underestimated. Many judges report feeling isolated and vulnerable, with some even considering stepping down from high-profile cases or seeking additional security measures. The Federal Judges Association has expressed concern that this climate of fear could lead to a decline in judicial morale, potentially affecting the fairness and impartiality of court proceedings.
A Bipartisan Issue with Grave Consequences
While the majority of threats appear to target judges who have ruled against Trump’s administration, the issue transcends political affiliations. Judges appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents have been subjected to similar forms of harassment and intimidation. This bipartisan dimension of the problem underscores the gravity of the situation and the need for a unified response from the legal community and political leaders alike.
As the judiciary continues to face these challenges, the focus must remain on safeguarding judicial independence and ensuring that judges can perform their duties without fear of reprisal. The integrity of the judicial system depends on it, and the consequences of inaction could be detrimental to the very foundations of American democracy.
Conclusion
The escalating threats against federal judges, particularly those who have ruled against Trump’s administration, pose a significant threat to the independence of the judiciary and the integrity of the democratic system. These threats, ranging from menacing voicemails to coordinated harassment tactics like “pizza doxing,” create a climate of fear that extends beyond the judges themselves to their families and personal lives. The rhetoric employed by Trump and his allies has further eroded public trust in the judiciary, emboldening those who seek to intimidate judges and undermine the rule of law. The psychological toll on judges, coupled with the bipartisan nature of the attacks, underscores the urgent need for a unified response to safeguard judicial independence and ensure that judges can perform their duties without fear of reprisal. The consequences of inaction could be detrimental to the very foundations of American democracy.
FAQ
Why are federal judges facing increasing threats?
Federal judges are facing increasing threats due to a combination of factors, including political rhetoric, coordinated harassment tactics, and a broader erosion of respect for the rule of law. Judges who have ruled against Trump’s administration are particularly targeted, creating a climate of fear and intimidation.
What is “pizza doxing,” and how does it work?
“Pizza doxing” is a form of harassment where individuals order pizzas and other items to be delivered to a target’s home or office using publicly available information. This tactic is designed to cause disruption and fear, extending beyond the target to their family and personal life.
How does political rhetoric contribute to the endangerment of judges?
Political rhetoric, particularly from Trump and his allies, has been damaging as it undermines the public’s perception of the judiciary. By labeling judges as “sick” or “dangerous,” this rhetoric creates an environment where judges become vulnerable to public hostility and emboldens those who seek to intimidate them.
How do these threats impact judicial morale and independence?
The psychological toll of these threats on judges should not be underestimated. Many judges report feeling isolated and vulnerable, with some considering stepping down from high-profile cases or seeking additional security measures. This climate of fear could lead to a decline in judicial morale, potentially affecting the fairness and impartiality of court proceedings.
Are these threats limited to judges appointed by a specific political party?
No, the threats are not limited to judges appointed by a specific political party. Judges appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents have been subjected to similar forms of harassment and intimidation, highlighting the bipartisan nature of the issue and the need for a unified response.
