Senator aims to deter attacks on judges by upping penalties for threats
Legislation proposed by Sen. Raj Mukherji intends to crack down on people who threaten judges at a time when judges say attacks on them are growing. (Photo by Dana DiFilippo/New Jersey Monitor)
A state senator wants to toughen penalties against people who threaten judges and prosecutors in New Jersey, with attacks on judges escalating as the Trump administration feuds with courts from coast to coast.
Sen. Raj Mukherji (D-Hudson) said he was driven to act after U.S. District Judge Esther Salas revealed recently that judges around the U.S. have received unsolicited pizza deliveries sent in the name of her son Daniel Anderl, who was gunned down in 2020 at the family's home by an angry litigant.
'These are unprecedented attacks on judicial officers,' Salas told MSNBC in several weekend appearances on the news network.
Under a bill Mukherji plans to introduce, it would become a second-degree crime — with a presumption of incarceration — to threaten, harass, intimidate, or dox local, county, state and federal judges and prosecutors over their work performance.
The offense would be upgraded to a first-degree crime if it occurs at or within 500 feet of the home of a prosecutor, judge, or their immediate family members. That includes sending items or messages to a home protected under Daniel's Law, which legislators passed after Anderl's murder to prohibit the disclosure of public officials' home addresses and phone numbers.
'In a democracy, disagreement is fair game, but intimidation and violence are not. They must be confronted swiftly and without hesitation with the full weight of the law,' Mukherji said in a statement. 'Judges and prosecutors must be free to perform their public duties without looking over their shoulders or worrying about the safety of their families. At a time when the independence of the judiciary is under attack and violence is on the rise, we must draw a hard line to protect those who serve justice.'
President Donald Trump, administration officials, and some members of Congress have personally attacked judges they disagree with in recent weeks on social media and in personal appearances.
That has resulted in a sharp uptick in threats to judges, including pizza deliveries to jurists' homes by people who have 'weaponized' Anderl's name, Salas said. The ominous deliveries send a clear message, she added: 'Do you want to end up like Judge Salas? Do you want to end up like her son?'
She urged other states to shield judges' personally identifiable information, as New Jersey legislators did with Daniel's Law, and officials at all levels to condemn attacks on the judiciary.
'Whether it be attacks that come in the form of some of our members of Congress calling for our impeachment because we're doing our jobs, members of this administration calling us rogue, calling us crazy, leftist, unconstitutional judges, or coming in the forms of these acts of intimidation, these are unprecedented times that really call for us to speak up for the judiciary, to speak up for justice,' Salas said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Johnson brushes off Musk campaign spending threats: ‘It doesn't concern me'
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) in an interview Friday brushed off Elon Musk's campaign spending threats in light of the tech billionaire's public fallout with President Trump, suggesting he isn't worried. The spat between Trump and Musk began with the latter's criticism of the president's legislative agenda making its way through Congress. Johnson said he built a closer relationship with the then-special government employee and that the tech mogul has been led astray regarding the 'big beautiful' spending package. 'Look, it doesn't concern me. We're going to win either way because we're going to win on our policies we're delivering for hardworking Americans and fulfilling those promises,' Johnson told Fox News's 'Jesse Watters Primetime.' 'But look, I like Elon and respect him. I mean, we became friends in all this process,' he continued. 'I've been texting with him even this week … in trying to make sure that he has accurate information about the bill. I think he has been misled about it.' Musk, who contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to assist in Trump's win in the 2024 presidential election, was the biggest donor during the White House race. Amid his recent spat with Trump, which broke out in public as the two traded insults and threats, Musk argued that without his political expenditures, Trump would have lost to former Vice President Harris, Republicans would lose the majority in the House and the GOP would have failed to flip the majority in the Senate. Trump then threatened to have all federal contracts associated with the billionaire's companies to be cut off. As the fight between the two intensified, the tech executive floated the idea of forming a third party and accused the president of being named in the late Jeffrey Epstein's files. Trump has denied close ties to the disgraced financier. Musk's opposition to the GOP megabill — which he called a 'disgusting abomination' — is largely tied to deficit spending. The billionaire argued the legislation would balloon the national debt and fails to slash enough spending. The package faces an uphill battle in the Senate. While Musk, who recently left his position as the top adviser to Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), seemed open to repairing ties on Friday, the president appeared to be OK with moving on. Johnson in the interview Friday defended the spending bill and commended Trump for his handling of the squabble. 'We're going to make good on this… I like the president's attitude. You know, he is moving on. He has to,' he told the host. 'He's laser-focused on delivering for the people. And House and Senate Republicans are as well. So, we've got our hand at the wheel.' 'We're going to get this done just like we told the people,' the Speaker continued. 'And if you are a hardworking American that is struggling to take care of your family, you are going to love this legislation.' The Louisiana Republican added, 'I'm telling you, all boats are going to rise and everybody's going to be in a much better mood before we go into that midterm election in 2026.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
New York Post
38 minutes ago
- New York Post
NYC needs a mayoral race centered on the city's needs, NOT Democrats' anti-Trump obsessions
Last week's debate confirmed that the Democrats running for mayor are competing almost exclusively on a near-irrelevant issue: who can fight President Donald Trump the most. The field of nine mentioned Trump more than 80 times in two hours; the only other theme to come close was the eight candidates' pile-on of the clear frontrunner among them, Andrew Cuomo. And even Cuomo has joined the club-Trump club: When he first entered the race, he talked about working with the White House; now he, too, vows to resist. Advertisement Reality check: New York City depends on more than $100 billion a year in federal aid. No, the law doesn't give any president a free hand to mess with most of that, but a Republican president with a Republican Congress is all too able to change the law to slow that flow. Especially when the feds face near-$2 trillion annual deficits, the city votes overwhelmingly Democratic, and New York state's few GOP members of Congress are stretched to cover their own constituents' needs. Advertisement The president is a son of Queens who rose to fame as an NYC developer, a lifelong Post reader still fond of the city even though the likes of state Attorney General Tish James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg have done their best to bankrupt and imprison him. With the eager cooperation of hack judges put on the bench by the city's Dem clubhouses. Yes, base Democratic voters despise the president; that's why James, Bragg & Co. waged their scorched-earth (but failed) lawfare against him, and why the mayoral candidates talk so tough. Advertisement Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani bragging he's 'Donald Trump's worst nightmare, as a progressive Muslim immigrant'; ex-city Comptroller Scott Stringer using his first TV ad to call the prez 'this schmuck' and promise to 'tell Trump where to stick it.' State Sen. Zellnor Myrie is offering a lunatic fantasy of withholding New Yorkers' federal income taxes, pretending 'that gives us the tax base so we can be independent of the White House.' Whaaat? Council Speaker Adrienne Adams announcing her run with trash talk about 'a mayor who will stand up to Trump'; Cuomo telling Politico his plan to stop Trump: 'I would spend eight years in Washington.' Gotham needs its mayor here; mayors have no power to intercept federal income taxes; Trump would like nothing more than to have a nepo baby Muslim socialist as a foil. Advertisement And the Democratic activist base that cheers this idiocy is only a fraction of the city's registered Democrats, let alone of the whole population. New York as a whole is a lot more in tune with Mayor Eric Adams' approach of working with Trump where practical, and fighting him as necessary — not far off his approach to President Joe Biden, by the way, and rightly so. Even if standing up to Biden won him a federal investigation that may well have ended his political career. We can't say where all this leads, only that Trump Derangement Syndrome has produced a Democratic primary where the basic needs and interests of New York City are thisclose to irrelevant. Even candidates that we know know better are painting themselves into corners that will ill-serve the general public if they win. Regular New Yorkers want homes they can afford, schools that teach, safe streets and subways; anti-Trump performative politics loses ground on every front. Whoever wins the Democratic primary will certainly be the favorite to win in November, but it sure feels like this is a race to an idiotic bottom. A race that's setting up New York City to lose, big time.
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
House witness flips script on Dem who ambushed him during hearing with unearthed tweet: 'Iceberg is ahead'
FIRST ON FOX: A House committee witness that was called out by Democratic Rep. Robert Garcia of California during a hearing this week is pushing back after the congressman unearthed a past social media post on Social Security in an attempt to discredit his testimony. During a House oversight DOGE subcommittee hearing on Wednesday, Garcia grilled Power the Future CEO Dan Turner while holding up a posterboard of a past tweet calling Social Security a "government-sponsored Ponzi scheme." "Madoff went to jail for it. Congress runs on it," the post said. "I should be able to keep 100% of my money and not watch government waste it with a paltry percentage return." Garcia then suggested that post was evidence that Turner lacks the credibility to be testifying about the billions of federal tax dollars directed to left-wing NGOs. "A Ponzi scheme and so I think it's interesting, of course, as one of our Republican witnesses is calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme, and that's the person that we should be taking advice from here today," Garcia said. "Without Social Security, 22 million people would be pushed into poverty. That includes over 16 million seniors and nearly 1 million children. And in fact, Elon Musk has also said and agreed with you, sir, that this is a Ponzi scheme. I think it's ironic that you are one of our witnesses talking about efficiency when you want to attack the single best program that we have to support people not just out of poverty, but across this country to uplift them, to ensure they can afford a decent life." Fox News Digital spoke to Turner, who stood by his post and outlined his belief, echoed by many, that Social Security is structured like a Ponzi scheme by definition. "Rep Garcia does not know the definition of Ponzi scheme," Turner said. "Social Security is the ultimate Ponzi, demanding more and more people at the bottom pay in to fund the people at the top, expect our demographics have this now reversed. The system will default. Mr. Garcia nor I will likely never see a dime. That should worry him more than my social media feed." Turner told Fox News Digital that if Garcia's staff spent as much time trying to save Social Security as it did "combing through my social media" then "perhaps the Ponzi scheme can survive long enough for me to get a small percentage of what the government confiscated during my lifetime." Turner explained that his father received a "paltry percentage" of what he paid into the program and the the government "kept the rest" when his father died. "That's not just a Ponzi scheme, it's government greed and politicians running a money-laundering operation to get reelected. No one should be compelled to pay into a failed system, yet in a free America, you don't have that choice." In addition to Turner and Elon Musk suggesting that Social Security is by definition set up like a Ponzi scheme, Fox News Digital previously spoke to James Agresti, president of the nonprofit research institute Just Facts, who said the characterization has "validity." "A Ponzi scheme operates by taking money from new investors to pay current investors," Agresti said. "That's the definition given by the SEC, and contrary to popular belief, that's exactly how Social Security operates." Agresti explained to Fox News Digital that Social Security, a program mired for decades with concerns about waste, fraud, and improper payments, "doesn't take our money and save it for us, as many people believe, and then give it to us when we're older" like many Americans might believe. "What it does is, it transfers money when we are young and working and paying into Social Security taxes," Agresti said. "That money, the vast bulk of it, goes immediately out the door to people who are currently receiving benefits. Now there is a trust fund, but in 90 years of operation, that trust fund currently has enough money to fund two years of program operations." The trust fund only being able to last for two years is not a result of the fund being "looted," Agresti explained, but rather it was put in place to "put surpluses in it" from money that Social Security collects in taxes that it doesn't pay out immediately and pays interest on. "The interest that's been paid on that has been higher than the rate of inflation," Agresti said. "So, the problem isn't that the trust fund has been looted. The problem is that Social Security operates like a Ponzi scheme." Democrats have vocally pushed back against efforts by Republicans and DOGE to reform Social Security or make cuts to what they say are examples of wasteful or improper spending from the department. "There's been a lot of misinformation about that as of late," Agresti told Fox News Digital. "You know, when DOGE came in and suggested that the Social Security Administration cut, I think it was about 10,000 workers, Democrats erupted that this is going to weaken Social Security. But the fact of the matter is that Social Security pays those workers who are for administrative overhead from the Social Security trust fund. So, by cutting out the money that they're paying them, you actually strengthen the program financially." Agresti told Fox News Digital that the current administrative overhead for Social Security is $6.7 billion per year, which is enough to pay more than 300,000 retirees the average old age benefit. "Every single study shows social security going completely bankrupt in the next few years. Garcia and other democrats know the iceberg is ahead but rather than turn the ship, they are yelling at the iceberg about the senior citizens onboard," Turner said. "This Ponzi scheme is collapsing fast, and turning my tweets into posters is not going to stop it."
