After the Supreme Court recently struck down President Trump’s tariffs, the president publicly attacked two justices he had nominated — part of a pattern of denouncing judges after unfavorable decisions. Reporters who interviewed 26 federal judges, both sitting and retired (nine Democratic appointees and 17 Republican appointees), found many feeling besieged; several sitting judges refused on-camera interviews for fear of their safety.
Reagan appointee Judge John Coughenour of the federal district court in Washington state said he was unprepared for the intensity of the backlash after he blocked an effort to end birthright citizenship. His family was the target of a hoax report that his wife had been murdered, prompting a SWAT-style response by deputies, followed by a bomb threat and a circulated “wanted” poster bearing judges’ photos and near-explicit calls for violence. He said he has received dozens or even hundreds of death threats — a level of hostility he has never seen in his 44-year career. Coughenour blamed an organized political effort to undermine the federal judiciary and stressed judges’ role in applying the Constitution.
Several judges linked incendiary public comments about the courts — including disparaging labels used by the president — with a surge in violent messages. Reporters obtained voicemail threats left after rulings that included wishes of rape and decapitation directed at judges’ families and direct calls for assassination. The U.S. Marshals Service, which assesses threats and provides protection, is stretched thin: last year about 400 federal judges were the target of serious threats, a roughly 78 percent increase over four years.
Retired Judge John Jones, a George W. Bush appointee from Pennsylvania, warned bluntly that the nation risks a judge being killed if the problem is not addressed. Jones and 55 other retired judges formed a bipartisan coalition to press the White House to stop demonizing the courts. He told reporters he sees efforts from the current administration to delegitimize the judiciary as a way to expand presidential power amid a Congress that he described as largely inactive.
Judge Esther Salas, an Obama appointee in New Jersey and an outspoken critic of attacks on judges, described the stakes as both personal and institutional. In 2020 a disgruntled litigant went to her home, murdered her son Daniel and wounded her husband. Although that attack was not politically motivated, Salas said today’s national rhetoric increases the likelihood of similar tragedies. She urged people who disagree with rulings to use the appeals process instead of dehumanizing judges.
Salas and others described newer forms of intimidation: unsolicited pizzas and packages sent to judges and their children with threatening messages, and orders placed in the name of her murdered son — an act she said weaponizes her child to frighten the judiciary. At least 20 such pizza deliveries were traced to attempts to intimidate judges using Daniel’s name.
The White House response referenced the president’s own experience surviving assassination attempts and accused the judiciary of “brazen defiance” and unlawful rulings. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche reportedly described the situation internally as a war and criticized some judges for issuing overbroad injunctions; he also acknowledged that threats and intimidation of federal officials are illegal. The Justice Department declined on-camera interviews for the story.
Judges emphasized that an independent judiciary is essential to the rule of law and warned that efforts to delegitimize the courts threaten that role. While threats have come from across the political spectrum — including earlier incendiary remarks by leaders on the left that were later apologized for — several interviewees said the extreme violent rhetoric and coordinated targeting seen in recent years has been driven predominantly from the right.
Ron Zayas, CEO of Ironwall, a firm that removes personal data from the internet, said in 14 years he has never seen the current volume or severity of violent threats aimed at judges. His team monitors both surface and dark web activity and has observed a shift from direct calls for violence to broader strategies intended to influence judicial behavior through intimidation and mob pressure. He noted that mass broadcasts of hostile messages increase the chance that at least one person will act on them.
The U.S. Marshals are investigating threats, doxxing and the campaign of deliveries and packages intended to intimidate judges and their families. Many judges urged political leaders to temper their rhetoric and more forcefully condemn harassment and threats. Salas said she has not seen public statements from the attorney general or deputy attorney general that directly address the judiciary’s safety concerns.
“I sit here as Daniel’s mom,” Salas said, describing how irresponsible public behavior by leaders makes her fear for the safety of judges and for the health of American democracy. Judges interviewed called on officials at all levels to denounce intimidation and to let the legal process — appeals and the courts’ work — resolve disputes rather than inciting or excusing threats.