George Conway @gtconway.bsky.social
"Wait till the White House starts directing the Marshals Service not to protect
judges who rule against the Administration.
I’d bet good money that’ll happen at some point."
REUTERS:
Exclusive: Judges face rise in threats as Musk blasts them over rulings
By Peter Eisler, Mike Spector, Ned Parker and Nate Raymond
March 5, 2025
"Summary
Musk's social media posts criticize judges, calling them "corrupt" and "radical"
Judges report increased threats, U.S. Marshals warn of high threat levels
Legal experts warn attacks on judges threaten judicial independence
WASHINGTON, March 5 (Reuters) - U.S. Marshals have warned federal judges
of unusually high threat levels as tech billionaire Elon Musk and other Trump
administration allies ramp up efforts to discredit judges who stand in the way of
White House efforts to slash federal jobs and programs, said several judges
with knowledge of the warnings.
In recent weeks, Musk, congressional Republicans and other top allies of U.S.
President Donald Trump have called for the impeachment of some federal
judges or attacked their integrity in response to court rulings that have slowed
the Trump administration's moves to dismantle entire government agencies
and fire tens of thousands of workers.
00:26
Supreme Court won't let Trump block USAID project funds
The video player is currently playing an ad. You can skip the ad in 5 sec with a
mouse or keyboard
Musk, the world's richest person, has lambasted judges in more than 30 posts
since the end of January on his social media site X, calling them “corrupt,”
“radical,” “evil” and deriding the "TYRANNY of the JUDICIARY" after judges
blocked parts of the federal downsizing that he’s led. The Tesla CEO has also
reposted nearly two dozen tweets by others attacking judges.
Reuters interviews with 11 federal judges in multiple districts revealed mounting
alarm over their physical security and, in some cases, a rise in violent threats in
recent weeks. Most spoke on condition of anonymity and said they did not want
to further inflame the situation or make comments that could be interpreted as
conflicting with their duties of impartiality. The Marshals Service declined to
comment on security matters.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Report this ad
As Reuters documented in a series of stories last year, political pressure on
federal judges and violent threats against them have been rising since the
2020 presidential election, when federal courts heard a series of highly
politicized cases, including failed lawsuits filed by Trump and his backers
seeking to overturn his loss. Recent rhetorical attacks on judges and the rise in
threats jeopardize the judicial independence that underpins America’s
democratic constitutional order, say legal experts.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Report this ad
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, in his annual year-end report
in December, warned about a rising number of threats to the judiciary's
independence, including calls for violence against judges and "dangerous"
suggestions by elected officials to disregard court rulings they disagree with.
On social media, Musk and Republican lawmakers have described judges as
threats to democracy, turning the role of the federal judiciary -- a branch of
government created to check executive and congressional power -- on its
head. ''The only way to restore rule of the people in America is to impeach
judges,'' Musk wrote in one post. “No one is above the law, including judges.”
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Musk did not respond to a request for comment about his wave of criticism
against the judiciary.
Several judges said the U.S. Marshals Service, which provides judicial security,
has informed them of a heightened threat environment over the past several
weeks, either verbally or in writing. The Marshals also discussed security
measures, the judges said, including regular searches for threatening posts
online.
Two New York federal judges -- U.S. District Judges Paul Engelmayer and
Jeannette Vargas -- are receiving extra security after their rulings blocked staff
from the Musk-driven Department of Government Efficiency from accessing
sensitive Treasury Department data, according to a person with knowledge of
the matter. Engelmayer and Vargas did not respond to requests for comment.
Another person familiar with the judicial security environment said several
federal judges in the Washington D.C. area had received pizzas sent
anonymously to their homes, which is being interpreted by law enforcement as
a form of intimidation meant to convey that a target’s address is known.
“I’ve never seen judges as uneasy as they are now,” said John Jones III, a
former U.S. district judge in Pennsylvania appointed by former Republican
President George W. Bush in 2002.
Jones, who also served on the security committee of the federal judiciary's
policymaking arm, said judges are now grappling with being identified by name
in viral social media posts criticizing their integrity and demanding their
impeachment. He said he has spoken to about a dozen current judges who
expressed safety concerns for themselves and their families.
“The consequences are, quite starkly, that we’re going to get a judge killed if
we’re not careful,” said Jones.
Federal courts are hearing more than 100 lawsuits challenging the
administration’s initiatives, many of them focused on efforts driven by Musk
and his team at DOGE to purge hundreds of thousands of federal employees
and dramatically scale back government aid and regulatory programs.
Trump and his White House press secretary also have criticized judges they
describe as activists who have issued orders that slowed or blocked some of
those efforts.
Asked about Musk's comments, White House spokesperson Harrison Fields
said that Musk was speaking in his personal capacity and that the White House
has taken no position on whether judges should be impeached. He said
"threats against judges are unacceptable, and the president condemns such
actions," and that appropriate law enforcement agencies that are tasked with
surveilling such threats are doing so.
"The White House condemns any threats to really any public officials, despite
our feelings that a lot of these people are leftist, crazy judges that aren't
following the Constitution," Fields said. "Just because these people are leftist,
crazy, unconstitutional people doesn't mean they deserve to be harmed. That's
not how you engage with disputes in this country."
“WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL”
When U.S. District Judge Amir Ali ruled on February 25 that the Trump
administration must resume U.S. foreign aid payments that Trump had halted,
Musk and other allies of the president called for the judge’s removal.
“When judges egregiously undermine the democratic will of the people, they
must be fired,” Musk posted on X.
In response to that post, some of Musk’s followers on X said the judge should
be arrested for treason or deported. One suggested “US patriots fire upon him.”
Some assailed his Muslim heritage and questioned his patriotism, including one
who falsely asserted Ali had ties to Muslim militant groups.
After an earlier February ruling by Ali in the same case, an X user called for him
to be beheaded. Another questioned “why so few judges are hanged.” One
posted a picture of a noose.
Ali didn’t respond to a request for comment on the threats against him.
“The chatter among judges is we have to be careful,” one federal judge said in
an interview. Judges overseeing Trump cases receive widespread media
coverage, heightening security concerns when their decisions prove
controversial, the judge said.
Several judges described threatening phone calls promising personal harm.
The American Bar Association issued a statement on Monday denouncing the
ongoing wave of verbal assaults and threats against judges. The Federal
Judges Association said in a statement to its 1,100 members late on Tuesday
that “continued violence, intimidation and defiance directed at judges simply
because they are fulfilling their sworn judicial duties” risked “the collapse of the
rule of law.”
Threats against judges have climbed sharply since Trump ramped up his
criticism of the judiciary after he lost the 2020 election. In that time, serious
threats against federal judges more than doubled, from 220 in 2020 to 457 in
2023. Last year, Reuters documented how Trump’s attacks on judges who rule
against his interests often lead to waves of threats against them.
Calls for impeachment of judges have added a new wrinkle to the hostility
some judges face Republicans in Congress have introduced impeachment
articles against three judges, including Ali, who have ruled against Trump’s
executive orders.
Americans have called for impeaching judges before, including failed efforts
against Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren after he delivered a landmark
opinion in 1954 outlawing racial segregation in public schools. But
impeachment is historically rare. It’s typically reserved for gross misconduct
and never intended as a weapon against judges who issue an unpopular ruling,
said judges and legal scholars.
Convicting judges on articles of impeachment requires a two-thirds vote of the
U.S. Senate, where Republicans hold only a slim majority.
The vitriolic rhetoric has given pause to members of the judiciary who have
been touched firsthand by violence. U.S. District Judge Esther Salas, whose
son was killed when a would-be assassin showed up at her home in 2020,
warned of the consequences of stoking public rage against judges.
“ It really is dangerous to use disparaging words because it leads to death, as in
my case,” Salas said in an interview. “It leads to the ratcheting up of already
very high emotion. And you know I'm living proof.”"
Get weekly news and analysis on U.S. politics and how it matters to the world
with the Reuters Politics U.S. newsletter. Sign up here.
Spector and Parker reported from New York. Raymond reported from Boston.
Additional reporting by Joseph Tanfani. Editing by Jason Szep
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab
Mike Spector
Thomson Reuters
Mike Spector is an Investigative Reporter for Reuters’ legal team. He strives to
pursue special reports and other enterprising and exclusive stories that expose
wrongdoing, highlight threats to consumers and illuminate how ordinary people
are affected by the decisions of judges and lawyers across the United States.
His stories often involve corporate crises linked to bankruptcy proceedings,
mass tort litigation and government investigations. He was the first journalist to
expose Johnson and Johnson’s plan to offload into bankruptcy lawsuits
alleging its iconic Baby Powder and other cosmetic talc products caused
cancer. A series he led explaining how companies and nonprofits use the
bankruptcy system to evade lawsuits over sexual abuse and deadly products
received the Deadline Club’s Daniel Pearl Award for Investigative Reporting. He
has also investigated pervasive secrecy in American courts that covers up
evidence of deadly products and allegations from Black women that chemical
hair relaxers sold by large cosmetics companies caused cancer. He previously
worked at The Wall Street Journal covering bankruptcy, private equity, mergers
and acquisitions and the automotive industry.
Nate Raymond
Thomson Reuters
|
|