Federal judges who have ruled against the Trump administration this year are confronting a wave of threats, potentially compromising their personal safety and the independence of the judiciary.
The sister of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett
received a bomb threat earlier this month, and lower court judges who hit pause
on some of President Trump's efforts to dismantle federal agencies and programs
have been singled out on social media, reported NPR.
Republican lawmakers close to the president even have proposed
impeachment proceedings against a few of those judges, who serve for life.
Elon Musk, who oversees the Department of Government
Efficiency making cuts to federal agencies, himself has repeatedly posted
on social media about impeaching judges
who delay or block parts of Trump's agenda.
Efforts to undermine the judiciary come at the same time the
Trump administration has moved to fire
lawyers inside the Justice Department and the Pentagon, penalize private
law firms who represented clients Trump does not like, and to back
away from participation in the activities of the American Bar Association.
Judge Richard Sullivan, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit, said in his lifetime four federal judges have been killed in
retaliation for their work on the bench.
"This is not hypothetical," Sullivan, who leads a
Judicial Conference panel on security issues, told reporters in a news
conference this week. The Judicial Conference is a representative body of
federal judges that frames policies for courts. "It's real. It's happened
before. We have to be certain that it doesn't happen again," he said.
The Federal Judges Association, a voluntary group of more
than 1,000 judges across the nation, said the judiciary plays a "critical
role in preserving democracy and a law-abiding society."
"Judges must be able to do their jobs without fear of
violence or undue influence," the group said in a written statement to
NPR.
Early threats
One thing stands out to legal experts: these attacks on
judges are coming at a very early stage in the legal process — often, before
the Supreme Court weighs in as the final decider.
"We have a system of justice that allows for
appeals," Judge Jeffrey Sutton, chief judge of the Sixth Circuit Court of
Appeals, told reporters this week. "That's typically the way it works.
Impeachment is not and shouldn't be a short-circuiting of that process. And so
it is concerning if impeachment is used in a way that is designed to do just
that."
Only 15 federal judges have faced impeachment, mostly for
allegations of wrongdoing such as bribery, corruption or perjury, in the past
couple of centuries.
Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University,
said the odds of a successful judicial impeachment are pretty low, and to
remove a judge from the bench would require a two-thirds vote from the Senate.
"The more that people like Elon Musk are putting on the
wall the idea that it's appropriate to attack these judges for nothing more
than ruling against the federal government, the more that we're normalizing
what really are in the main very serious threats to judicial
independence," Vladeck said.
"Jeopardize the rule of law"
But Paul Grimm, who spent 26 years as a federal judge, said
even the threat of impeachment can amount to intimidation.
"And if you try to intimidate judges, if that's your
goal, so that they do not do their constitutional duty, then you jeopardize the
rule of law," said Grimm, who leads the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke
Law School. "And without the rule of law, every liberty and every right
that we cherish as Americans is vulnerable."
Grimm said he worries a lot about online posts that display
the home and work addresses of judges and their adult children, a step that he
said "crosses the line."
Nearly five years ago, an angry litigant shot and killed the
son of U.S. District Judge Esther
Salas in New Jersey.
In 2022, a California man carrying a gun and zip ties
traveled to the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh. He turned away after spotting
a security detail there. The man has pleaded not guilty to a charge of
attempted assassination of the justice, and awaits trial this year.
And in 2023, a state
court judge in Maryland was gunned down in his driveway.
Attacks over rulings
The U.S. Marshals say threats against federal judges have
doubled in recent years, according to the most recent data. And those threats
have been directed at both Democratic and Republican judges.
Justice Barrett came under withering criticism this month
from some right-wing political commentators, after she voted alongside Chief
Justice John Roberts and the liberals on the high court against Trump's effort
to freeze foreign aid.
Lower court judges have faced online attacks for their early
rulings on Musk's DOGE team, efforts to restore government web pages and the
freeze on foreign aid.
The Marshals protect judges, but they also report to the
U.S. attorney general, not to the courts themselves. That's got some members of
Congress on alert.
"A judge's security is dependent in many ways on the
Marshals Service who the president appoints to protect the judges, and if a
president doesn't like a decision that's coming from a judge, theoretically
they could pull their security," Rep. Eric Swalwell, a Democrat from
California, said at a congressional hearing this month.
The administration has already yanked protection this year
from former military and national security officials who disagreed with Trump
in his first term.
Swalwell said Congress should consider giving judges their
own security force — one that's independent from the White House.
To read more CLICK HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment