logo
Threats against judges nearly doubled under Trump. Republicans blame the victim.

Threats against judges nearly doubled under Trump. Republicans blame the victim.

Yahoo4 hours ago

Kathleen O'Malley spent nearly three decades as a federal judge and knows what it feels like when the U.S. Marshals and FBI come calling with warnings about threats of harm. A jailhouse informant once revealed that another inmate was plotting to have her killed.
O'Malley, who returned to private practice in 2022 after 16 years as a district judge in Ohio and 12 years on the U.S. Court of Appeals, told me she always knew during her time on the bench that the U.S. Department of Justice "had my back" when threats came up.
She felt a shift during President Donald Trump's first administration, a confluence of his aggressive attacks on judges who made him follow the law and the amplifying impact of his criticism through social media. The point of all that, O'Malley told me, is to intimidate judges, to prevent them from ruling against a president willing to target them just for doing their jobs.
O'Malley, who once sat on a judicial committee tasked with making courthouses safe and secure, spoke to me this week because I am tracking an effort to increase funding for federal judicial security. That push comes after funding has been flat in the past two federal fiscal years, despite a growing number of threats against judges.
The call for more funding has drawn predictable pushback from some Republicans in the U.S. House, including some who have vilified judges for holding Trump accountable when he was out of office and for making his administration obey the U.S. Constitution now that he has returned to the White House.
Sign up for our Opinion newsletter on people, power and policies in the time of Trump from columnist Chris Brennan. Get it delivered to your inbox.
Judges don't come to this on a level playing field, O'Malley pointed out. The president is the commander in chief of our military. Congress controls spending. Judges? All they have is "the ability to persuade," she said.
That should be enough.
An NBC News poll released June 16 found that 81% of Americans said Trump should obey a federal court order if a judge rules his actions are illegal. That number drops to just 50% among Trump supporters.
Opinion: The most 'beautiful' part of Trump's bill is it helps him defy federal courts
So Trump just keeps turning up the heat as judges hold him accountable to the law. And his allies in the House shrug off the danger, while echoing his attacks.
U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, the Ohio Republican who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, told Punchbowl News on June 13 that he sees few members "excited" to increase judicial security funding, in his reaction to a report that noted that threats against judges have nearly doubled since Trump took office.
U.S. Rep. Chip Roy, a Texas Republican who also sits on the Judiciary Committee, played the blame-the-victim game when asked about security for federal judges. 'Maybe they should stop screwing everything up,' Roy told Punchbowl News.
Trump allies like Jordan and Roy offer cheap, empty rhetoric. The federal judiciary comes prepared with cold, hard math.
The federal judiciary's $9.4 billion budget request for fiscal year 2026, which starts on Oct. 1, includes $892 million for security, a 19% increase of $142 million after no increases in fiscal years 2024 and 2025.
Judge Amy St. Eve, who was elevated by Trump's appointment in 2018 to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, testified to Congress in May in support of the increase for security funding, telling the House members, "The threat environment facing judges and the judiciary as a whole right now is particularly dynamic and worrisome."
Judge Robert Conrad Jr., appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush 20 years ago, was named in 2024 by U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts as director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. He testified to Congress about the budget request with St. Eve and singled out threats of judicial impeachment being made by Trump and his allies.
'The independence of the judicial branch is jeopardized when judges are threatened with harm or impeachment for their rulings," Conrad warned. "Our constitutional system depends on judges who can make decisions free from threats and intimidation."
Opinion: Trump's military show of force in LA and DC camouflage his failing presidency
That echoes what Roberts wrote in his 2024 report on the federal judiciary, in which he said threats of impeaching judges for how they rule are "inappropriate and should be vigorously opposed." Roberts noted that the U.S. Marshals Service said "hostile threats" against judges have "more than tripled over the past decade."
U.S. Rep. Michael Cloud, a Texas Republican, took offense during the testimony by St. Eve and Conrad, but not about the threats aimed at judges.
No, Cloud said, the real danger came from judges like St. Eve, Conrad and Roberts linking the politically motivated calls for impeachment to the increase in threats to judges across the country.
Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store.
As with his colleagues, Jordan and Roy, Cloud wants us to blame the targets of those threats, federal judges, and not focus on anything politicians say that might help fuel those threats.
The three of them, with their rhetoric, are all the evidence we need to demonstrate that an increase in security funding for federal judges is well worth it and long overdue. They, along with Trump, show no signs of stopping their attacks. We, as Americans, must provide for the safety of judges so they can uphold our laws.
Follow USA TODAY columnist Chris Brennan on X, formerly known as Twitter: @ByChrisBrennan. Sign up for his weekly newsletter, Translating Politics, here.
You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: As Trump targets judges, GOP bristles at protecting them | Opinion

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Senate Gun, Silencer Provisions Blocked From Trump Tax Bill
Senate Gun, Silencer Provisions Blocked From Trump Tax Bill

Bloomberg

time10 minutes ago

  • Bloomberg

Senate Gun, Silencer Provisions Blocked From Trump Tax Bill

By and Erik Wasson Updated on Save Senate Republicans' effort to use President Donald Trump's massive tax bill to eliminate regulations on short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns and silencers has hit a roadblock with the chamber's rules-keeper. The Senate parliamentarian decided the policy provisions violate the fast-track budget rules Republicans are using to avoid a filibuster and pass Trump's legislative agenda with only GOP support.

What Business Is Watching in Negotiations Over Big Policy Bill
What Business Is Watching in Negotiations Over Big Policy Bill

New York Times

time12 minutes ago

  • New York Times

What Business Is Watching in Negotiations Over Big Policy Bill

Andrew here. We're focused on the scramble to salvage Republicans' major policy bill and how it could affect business and the economy. We've also got more on the New York mayoral race moves by business leaders and reporting by Danielle Kaye on the financial health of Saks Global. A.I. is also on our minds. Check out some fun excerpts from an interview with Patrick Collison, the co-founder of Stripe, conducted by my colleagues Kevin Roose and Casey Newton of The Times's 'Hard Fork' podcast. And Sarah Kessler finds out how the C.E.O. of Twilio uses A.I. ministration — are making it harder to salvage the legislation, which corporate America is closely watching, in time. Here are the latest big changes: The Senate parliamentarian, a nonpartisan official who is reviewing whether the legislation complies with the chamber's budget rules, rejected a provision that would limit states' ability to get more federal Medicaid funds. (For the wonkily minded, they relate to a 'provider tax' loophole that nearly all states use.) Critics of the bill say it could lead to the shuttering of many rural hospitals. The administration directed lawmakers to remove the so-called revenge tax, which would have raised taxes for many companies based in countries that impose a global minimum tax or additional taxes on American tech giants. Business lobbyists have argued that it would chill international investment in America. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he had reached international agreements exempting U.S. companies from the global minimum tax. The Senate parliamentarian also asked lawmakers to rework a 10-year moratorium on the enforcement of state laws regulating artificial intelligence, according to Senator Maria Cantwell, Democrat of Washington and the ranking member of the Senate Commerce Committee. Here's a running list of other provisions the parliamentarian has rejected. Still unaddressed: the tax changes at the core of the legislation. Trump is turning up the heat on lawmakers. The White House held an event on Thursday to rally support for the legislation, at which the president praised the 'hundreds of things' to like about the bill. Trump has also been calling up individual senators, according to Punchbowl News. Whether or when that happens is unclear, however. Republican leaders are seeking to salvage many of the provisions with wording tweaks. (They've already done so with proposed cuts in federal funding for food assistance programs.) But Senator John Thune, the majority leader, has said that the chamber won't override the parliamentarian's rulings. Meanwhile, lawmakers still disagree on key provisions like caps on deductions for state and local taxes. And it's unclear whether House Republicans will approve whatever the Senate decides on. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

The Latest: Key Medicaid provision in Trump's bill found to violate Senate rules
The Latest: Key Medicaid provision in Trump's bill found to violate Senate rules

Washington Post

time14 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

The Latest: Key Medicaid provision in Trump's bill found to violate Senate rules

The Senate parliamentarian has advised that a Medicaid provider tax overhaul central to President Donald Trump's tax cut and spending bill doesn't adhere to the chamber's procedural rules, delivering a crucial blow as Republicans rush to finish the package this week. Republicans were counting on big cuts to Medicaid and other programs to offset trillions of dollars in Trump tax breaks , their top priority. The attention falling on Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough's ruling reflects a broader change in Congress: Lawmakers are increasingly trying to wedge top policy priorities into bills that can't be filibustered. That process comes with special rules designed to deter provisions unrelated to spending or taxes, and that's where the parliamentarian comes in, offering analysis of what does and doesn't qualify. Trump wants the legislation, which includes tax reductions, Medicaid cuts, and border enforcement, passed by July 4. Here's the latest: 11 a.m. — Trump receives an intelligence briefing in the Oval Office 3 p.m. — Trump will meet with foreign ministers from Congo and Rwanda in the Oval Office

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store