Political pressure on federal judges and violent threats against them have been escalating, especially since the Supreme Court decision ending a federal right to abortion in 2022 was leaked before it was announced.
Data from the U.S. Marshals Service, which is tasked with protecting federal judges, showed that in a five-month period leading up to March 1, 80 judges received threats, but over the next six weeks, an additional 162 received threats, a 102.5% increase, The New York Times reported Tuesday.
Since mid-April, the pace of the threats has slowed slightly, the data showed. Between April 14-May 27, it showed 35 additional judges receiving threats, but the total number of judges threatened this fiscal year — 277 — represents roughly a third of the judiciary.
The threat data was not released publicly but was provided to the Times by U.S. District Judge Esther Salas, a Barack Obama appointee, whose son, Daniel Anderl, was shot and killed at the entrance of her home by a self-described "anti-feminist" lawyer, and since then she has advocated judicial safety.
In his annual year-end report, Chief Justice John Roberts outlined four areas of concern: violence, intimidation, disinformation, and threats to defy court judgments, saying all four "undermine our Republic, and are wholly unacceptable."
Officials for the White House and Marshals Service did not immediately respond to requests by the Times for comment. The Marshals Service defines a threat as "any action or communication, whether explicit or implied, of intent to assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate or interfere" with any marshals-protected person, including federal judges, according to an internal document reviewed by the Times. That language mirrors a federal statute that treats as criminals those who interfere with federal officials performing their duties.
Marshals Service data showed there were threats against more than 400 judges in 2023, the year after the Supreme Court ended the federal right to an abortion. In June 2022, after the Supreme Court's ruling was leaked, an armed man tried to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh at his home.
The homes of Kavanaugh and the other conservative justices had been the subject of protests after the leaked majority decision by Justice Samuel Alito that showed the direction the court would take in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.
Although the Times tried to link the rise in threats to rhetoric by President Donald Trump and his administration, it did not mention such rhetoric delivered by Democrats, including Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who made what were perceived as attacks against Justices Neil Gorsuch and Kavanaugh at an abortion rights rally in March 2020 outside the Supreme Court while it was hearing a case on abortion restrictions.
"I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh," Schumer said. "You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions."
Schumer's comments were widely criticized as threatening by Roberts, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and others, prompting Roberts to issue a rare public rebuke, calling the statements "inappropriate" and "dangerous."
Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz told Newsmax on May 3 that there is historic precedence for a presidential administration to criticize judges.
"This is not new," Dershowitz said. "Thomas Jefferson attacked judges appointed by John Adams much, much more ferociously. [Abraham] Lincoln attacked judges, indeed, suspended the writ of habeas corpus. Franklin Delano Roosevelt intimidated judges, threatened that he would pack the [Supreme Court], and that resulted in the switch in time that saved nine."
Michael Katz ✉
Michael Katz is a Newsmax reporter with more than 30 years of experience reporting and editing on news, culture, and politics.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.