Attacks on the Judiciary and the Rule of Law

When U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Batten dismissed a case that challenged the integrity of Dominion voting machines in the 2020 election, he was deluged with hundreds of angry calls — including death threats to himself and his family — on his office telephone and personal cellphone. The U.S. Marshals Service gave extra protection for a few weeks, but only as long as funding allowed. The marshals’ budget is stretched thin, given the increasing number of credible threats against federal judges requiring investigation. Batten, by the way, had been appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee, who was randomly assigned the election interference case brought in Georgia, faced abusive calls and emails throughout the case. In 2024, an anonymous caller phoned in a fake bomb threat to the local police department. Nine police officers appeared at his door.

Every judge takes an oath to administer justice without bias. They swear to faithfully perform their duties under the Constitution and the laws of the United States. So it has come as a surprise to a lot of them in the last few years that by doing their jobs, they have unleashed a torrent of death threats and invective delivered through calls, texts, emails, and social media to their offices, homes — and to their families. The Marshals Service reports that significant threats to federal judges have doubled since 2021, according to Reuters. The Marshals logged 513 threats against 364 judges from October 2024 until November 2025.

Police arrested a Minnesota man in September for threatening to murder judges in his manifesto, “How to Kill a Federal Judge.” And while threats against judges have been increasing dramatically, American confidence in U.S. courts has been dropping. It hit a record low of 35%, a December 2024 Gallup Poll found. That’s similar to the opinions of the citizens of Myanmar, Syria and Venezuela about their judicial systems.

We find ourselves in this increasingly dangerous place in part because high-level officials in the current administration, including the president himself, have repeatedly denigrated the courts and judges by calling adverse rulings unlawful. They describe judges as “lunatics”, “rogue”, “unelected”, “nut jobs”, “radical left”, and “so-called judges”. Attorney General Pam Bondi regularly uses social media to attack judges. She even authorized an unprecedented lawsuit against the entire bench of the Maryland U.S. District Court because she disagreed with its rulings. In March President Trump and his allies called for the impeachment of the chief district judge in Washington for ruling against the administration.

When a federal judge in Boston blocked deportations to South Sudan, the White House described the judge as a “far left activist”. President Trump denounced “USA hating judges who suffer from an ideology that is sick, and very dangerous for our country.” Such inflammatory rhetoric has been adopted by anonymous posters on the Internet who sometimes put words into action.

According to press reports, after a Florida federal judge signed warrants authorizing the search of Mar-a-Lago for classified documents, he faced a flood of online attacks, many of which were anti-semitic. Although the search of Mar-a-Lago was anything but routine, the issuance of search warrants is. If probable cause was established by the Mar-a-Lago warrant applications, it would have been inconceivable for any responsible judge to decline to approve the search. In earlier times, it also would have been inconceivable that this judge’s manipulated photo would appear on Fox News where he was falsely depicted seated on a Jeffrey Epstein plane next to Ghislaine Maxwell. The Fox host Brian Kilmeade wrote the next day on X that the image “wasn’t real” and that the network was “showing a meme in jest.” It was a reckless “jest” that put a judge in danger.

Recently, more than 100 judges and their families have received unwanted pizza deliveries ordered under the name of Daniel Salas. The son of federal Judge Esther Salas, he was murdered in 2020 by a self-described “anti-feminist” lawyer who showed up at her home in New Jersey. The message behind the recent pizza deliveries is clear: We know where you live. Your family is in danger. Behave.

While the U.S. Supreme Court has received a boost in security funding, lower courts have not, although they are the courts that have more often ruled against the administration. On those benches, judges are facing death threats and have inadequate protection.

In addition to the ongoing psychological harm to targeted judges, what is the damage to the judicial system, to the rule of law? One judge acknowledged timing the release of significant orders for weekends or during vacations and alerting the local police department in advance. It’s not a stretch to imagine a judge questioning whether a ruling should be watered down or not issued at all, or whether a particularly contentious case can be delayed indefinitely or ducked under the recusal rules. Who wants to put themselves or their families in the crosshairs? Will more judges decide to take early retirement or move into private practice, leaving openings for successors more compliant with the administration than with the rule of law? When will the joy of public service be eclipsed by the risks inherent in the job?

Duke University’s Bolch Judicial Institute is working to enlist lawyers to defend judges and to educate the public on the role and responsibilities of the judiciary. The fear is that if not countered, the onslaught against judges will eventually diminish judicial independence. A threat is designed to coerce obedience. What if the judiciary knuckles under these threats? After all, law firms have yielded to pressure, as have universities, corporations, newspapers, major networks, and Congress.

Businesses, organizations, and individuals rely on a fair justice system to resolve disputes impartially. Judges cannot answer the verbal assaults, but lawyers can. Lawyers can write articles, give speeches, post on social media, and give credit and support to judges who stand up for the rule of law and judicial independence. Judges need to hear that we appreciate them when they rule faithfully and fearlessly, without regard to who the parties are.

If lawyers do not stand up for the rule of law, how can we expect others to do
it?