Legal leaders rally to defend judicial independence amid rising political attacks

Five years ago, an angry litigant showed up at New Jersey federal Judge Esther Salas' home and shot to death her 20-year-old son Daniel. On Tuesday, another federal judge received an unordered pizza delivery, and the sender was listed as Salas' son.

"They are using my son's name to send threatening pizza deliveries," Salas said in an interview a few minutes after she heard the news.

Federal judges say they are experiencing an unprecedented number of threats against themselves and their families, often from anonymous members of the public whipped up by heated political rhetoric.

The U.S. Marshal's Service reported that it had identified 80 credible threats against federal judges across the country during the first two months of 2025.

"The American people need to understand the threats being lobbed at judges for doing their jobs," Salas said.

Attempting to raise awareness about the issue, Salas is among a group of prominent judges, attorneys, and legal scholars who will participate in a national virtual forum Tuesday to talk about ways to defend the independence of the judiciary. Organized by Beverly Hills consumer attorney Paul Kiesel, the event brings together voices from across the legal spectrum who warn that attacks on judges undermine public trust and the rule of law itself.

Other speakers at the event include Dean Erwin Chemerinsky of UC Berkeley School of Law; Justice Eileen C. Moore of the 4th District Court of Appeal in Santa Ana; retired federal judge Paul Grimm of the District of Maryland; and Kenneth R. Feinberg, the special master of the 9/11 Fund.

The organizers of the event are careful to say this isn't about politics. "This is not a partisan issue. This is an American issue," Salas said. "Words matter. How we treat each other matters."

But left unsaid is that President Donald Trump and his allies are driving a lot of the vitriol with calls to impeach judges who block his agenda--particularly rulings protecting federal workers and noncitizens from removal without court hearings.

Last month, Trump called for the impeachment of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg after the judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking the administration's deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. Trump labeled Boasberg a "Radical Left Lunatic" and a "troublemaker," prompting Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) to introduce articles of impeachment, accusing Boasberg of abusing his judicial authority.

In February, Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) filed articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer after the judge barred the Department of Government Efficiency from accessing financial records held by the Treasury Department. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) also introduced resolutions to impeach several judges, including John Bates and Amir Ali of the D.C. District Court, both of whom had issued rulings unfavorable to the administration.

Trump's remarks prompted a rare public response from Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., who emphasized that impeachment is not a proper remedy for disagreements over judicial decisions, pointing instead to the appellate process. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court reinforced that principle by blocking a ruling from U.S. District Judge William H. Alsup, who had ordered the Trump administration to rehire thousands of probationary federal workers it had fired.

Democratic politicians have at times drawn criticism for their remarks about the judiciary. In March 2020, during an abortion rally outside the Supreme Court, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer addressed Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh by name, warning, "You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions." Chief Justice John Roberts rebuked the comments as "dangerous," and several Republicans echoed that criticism. Schumer accused them of "manufacturing outrage" but apologized, saying, "I should not have used the words I used yesterday. They did not come out the way I intended to."

President Obama also faced backlash for remarks about the Court. During his 2010 State of the Union address, he criticized the Court's Citizens United decision, saying it would "open the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign corporations -- to spend without limit in our elections." Justice Samuel Alito, in a rare public display of disapproval, was seen shaking his head and mouthing "not true," a moment that attracted widespread attention.

Salas, who began her bench career as a federal magistrate judge in 2006 and was confirmed as an Article III judge in 2011, echoed Roberts, saying she urges litigants to appeal rulings they dispute--a process the U.S. has had for over 200 years to resolve legal disagreements. But she said something must be done to quell the extra-judicial fervor federal judges are facing for their decisions.

"I'm very concerned about this bonfire that has been brewing for years," Salas said. "Instead of trying to squelch it, we are adding fuel to it. It is burning hotter than ever, and judge's lives are in danger."

"This is a time for us to speak up for justice and the rule of law," she said.

Tuesday's virtual event begins at 9 a.m. (Pacific). To attend go to To attend go to speakupforjustice.law.