In the decade since stepping down from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Shira Scheindlin has watched with alarm as threats and harassment against federal judges have reached unprecedented levels. The former judge, now a vocal advocate for judicial safety, warns that the escalating attacks threaten the very foundation of American democracy.
Scheindlin, who herself faced violent threats after controversial rulings, recalls being driven to work by U.S. Marshals and being blamed for potential crime spikes in New York City. But she says the current climate is far worse. "The frequency and volume of harassment are at extreme levels," she writes, noting that judges are committed to upholding the rule of law despite the dangers.
A recent report by the Brennan Center for Justice, which surveyed 35 sitting and retired federal judges, details harrowing experiences. One judge, after ruling against the Trump administration on immigration enforcement, received over 700 threatening calls to chambers. The judge's personal information, including home floor plans, was circulated online, forcing the family to spend heavily on security and prompting the child's school to increase active shooter drills.
The surge in threats is backed by data: security incidents of significant concern for judges rose by 57 percent in fiscal year 2025 and are on track to climb further. The dangers are not abstract—Judge Esther Salas of New Jersey lost her son in a 2020 attack at her home, a tragedy Scheindlin cites as a stark reminder of the stakes.
Scheindlin, who faced her own vitriol after the acquittal of a defendant named Osama Awadallah in a post-9/11 case, notes that while criticism is part of the job, today's threats are fueled by social media and political rhetoric. She points to then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche's description of a "war" with "rogue" judges and former President Trump's characterization of judges as "lunatics" and "monsters." One judge's name and face appeared on a "wanted" poster in Congress, and he was "swatted" and sent a fake pipe bomb threat.
Scheindlin argues that if political leaders continue to attack judges without consequence, the founders' vision of judicial independence will be lost. "The courts should be the place where disputes are resolved peacefully," she writes, "where the law rather than intimidation determines the outcome." The risk, she says, is that threats and baseless impeachments will deter qualified individuals from serving and influence judicial decisions.
She also highlights the broader implications for democracy, noting that judicial independence is under siege from multiple angles. Scheindlin calls for better protection for judges and their families, as well as more responsible rhetoric from politicians and pundits. "That is a price no democracy can afford," she concludes.
The Brennan Center report and Scheindlin's commentary come amid growing concerns about democratic resilience and the need to safeguard institutions. As threats escalate, the judiciary's ability to function impartially is at stake, a challenge that leaders across the political spectrum must address.
