Judges face rise in threats as Musk blasts them over rulings
Item
1 of 2 A person rides an electric unicycle while pulling a wagon loaded
with packages, in front of the Eastern District of New York Court
Federal Court House in New York City, U.S., February 5, 2025.
REUTERS/David 'Dee' Delgado
[1/2]A
person rides an electric unicycle while pulling a wagon loaded with
packages, in front of the Eastern District of New York Court Federal
Court House in New York City, U.S., February 5, 2025. REUTERS/David
'Dee' Delgado Purchase Licensing Rights - 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.
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.
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.
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.”
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.”
(This story has been refiled to add a full stop after 'face' in paragraph 28)
Spector
and Parker reported from New York. Raymond reported from Boston.
Additional reporting by Joseph Tanfani. Editing by Jason Szep
, opens new tab
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 reports on the federal judiciary and litigation. He can be reached at nate.raymond@thomsonreuters.com.