Federal judges who struck down President Trump’s executive actions are reporting an alarming surge of harassment and threats, a trend that has prompted a complete security overhaul across the judiciary. The latest wave of intimidation—ranging from fake police calls and pizza deliveries to doxing and possible foreign interference—has put the safety of judges, their families, and the integrity of the legal system in jeopardy.
Background/Context
For almost 45 years, Senior U.S. District Judge John Coughenour of the District Court in Seattle has presided over cases that tested the limits of federal law. In January 2025, three days after President Trump inaugurated, Coughenour blocked a major executive order aimed at curtailing birthright citizenship, labeling the proposal “blatantly unconstitutional.” Within hours, the Seattle judge became the target of a coordinated campaign of threats.
The incident highlights a broader pattern: because Trump’s administration has consistently vilified judges who refuse to rubber‑stamp its policy agenda, their workplaces and homes are increasingly under siege. The U.S. Marshals Service records 564 reported threats against judges in FY 2025 alone, and those numbers have tripled over the last decade. The rise coincides with a sharp uptick in domestic political polarization, the spread of online mobs, and the strategic use of cyber‑harassment by foreign actors.
Key Developments
- Swatting and False Reports: After Coughenour’s ruling, anonymous callers flooded the local sheriff’s department with false claims that the judge had barricaded himself and killed his wife, and then that a bomb had been placed in his mailbox. Police response teams arrived, only to discover the allegations were baseless. The judge boarded a gun—originally stored at the courthouse—to protect his household.
- Pizza Delivery Harassment: Judge Stephen Bough, who ruled against Trump’s deportation plan for five Missouri students, has received anonymous pizzas at 1 a.m. and 2 a.m. Both he and his daughter—living 800 miles away in Atlanta—were hit by these deliveries. Similar patterns plagued Judges Esther Salas (New Jersey) and Robert Lasnik (Washington), all of whom reported pizza deliveries aimed at their families and former addresses.
- Foreign‑Tied Cyber Harassment: FBI and Marshals investigations suggest that at least 20 of the pizza deliveries were sent in the name of Salas’s deceased son, Daniel Anderl, a serial killer who murdered the judge’s son in 2020. Cybersecurity firm Ironwall’s data indicate patterns consistent with Russian‑aligned activity, though no definitive attribution has emerged.
- Requests for Home Security Enhancements: The Marshals Service has accelerated its home‑security program, offering judges advanced perimeter sensors, biometric access, and surveillance systems. Still, the agency does not provide 24‑hour patrols unless a specific, credible threat is identified.
- Legislative Response: Congress passed the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act in 2022, enabling the redaction of judges’ personal data from public sites. However, grey‑market dark‑web archives remain a vulnerability.
Impact Analysis
For the judiciary, the psychological toll is immense. Judges perceive a breach of the assumed impartiality of the bench: the very people who uphold the rule of law are now forced to adopt defense mechanisms traditionally associated with the military. Many are leaving the city or moving to rural areas and enhancing all aspects of their personal security—a costly and emotionally draining decision that indirectly skews the composition of the federal judiciary.
International students and young legal professionals—often looking up to senior judges as mentors—must now grapple with a more hostile environment. The campaign of intimidation threatens the very spirit of academic freedom, discouraging students from engaging with cases that involve politically sensitive matters. It also risks deterring diverse talent from entering the federal bench, potentially perpetuating a homogenous voice that cannot adequately represent the nation’s demographics.
On the policy front, the trend underscores a systemic erosion of the separation of powers. When the top executive repeatedly labels judges’ rulings as “unlawful” or “corrupt,” it can embolden mob culture and political conspiracies, destabilizing the checks and balances that define the American system. The judiciary’s reputation has dipped: Chief Justice John Roberts’ annual report notes “an unprecedented rise in the frequency and severity of threats against our judges.”
Expert Insights/Tips
Legal scholars and security experts suggest a multi‑layered approach for handling increasing judicial security threats:
- Personal Information Management: Judges should routinely audit their online footprints. Using services like Ironwall to scrub personal data from public directories and dark‑web sites remains a first line of defense.
- Community Policing: Local law enforcement should establish rapid‑response protocols for suspected swatting incidents, ensuring that officers assess each situation without triggering armed response.
- Family Communication Protocols: Judges and their families are advised to avoid posting addresses or travel plans on social media. Confidential communication channels—such as encrypted messaging apps—should be employed for all operational details.
- Marshals Partnership: Securing the Marshals Service’s home‑security program is essential. Judges must inform marshals of any credible threats and work with specialized protective teams to assess risk.
- Legal Advocacy: Organizations like the American Bar Association and the National Judges Association should lobby for stronger legislative protections and independent funding for judge security units.
Swiss‑based cybersecurity analyst Ron Zayas emphasizes the importance of “building resilient protocols that anticipate foreign interference.” According to Zayas, “The weaponization of pizza deliveries is an extension of political trolling, but once you integrate it with doxing and targeted data leaks, you enter a new cyber‑terror realm.”
Looking Ahead
As the federal court system recalibrates its security posture, policymakers must debate whether the current resources—both human and financial—are adequate. The limited budget of the U.S. Marshals Service, coupled with an explosive rise in 2025 threats, has led to calls for new congressional appropriations.
In the political arena, it is unclear whether Trump’s administration will continue to amplify its rhetoric toward the judiciary. But the stark reminder that threats can spill into concrete action—swatting incidents, late‑night pizza deliveries, and *possible* foreign‑linked harassment—will likely influence future legislative and executive approaches to court security.
Uncertainty remains about the extent of foreign involvement in the incited harassment. While no official attribution has been made, the ongoing investigations hint at sophisticated state‑sponsored coordination. If confirmed, this would represent a new dimension of foreign interference, challenging U.S. authorities to protect the judiciary without compromising civil liberties.
For international students planning to practice law in the United States, understanding the evolving security landscape is essential. Law schools and bar associations must incorporate modules on judicial security and digital privacy into their curricula. Additionally, aspiring lawyers should seek mentorship from seasoned judges aware of contemporary threats and who practice risk mitigation first‑hand.
Reach out to us for personalized consultation based on your specific requirements.