Former President Donald Trump is getting ripped from all sides for his latest and most egregious attacks on U.S. judges. He went after Judge James Boasberg hard, who sits in Washington, D.C. Trump unleashed his threats after losing a series of bad decisions related to his executive orders. These events have caused widespread concern for the integrity of the judicial branch and the security of judges.
On March 25, Trump declared that “desperate times call for desperate measures, and Congress is going to act.” This announcement followed an increasing campaign against judges he views as unsupportive of his hard-right agenda. This wrath of Trump’s was predictably and directly focused Judge Boasberg’s way. He dubbed him a “radical left lunatic” and called for his impeachment and disbarment. Even more than usual, Trump is trying to intimidate or remove judges. The way he’s targeting those whose decisions go against his interests is part of a growing worrisome trend.
After accusing Judge Beryl Howell of political bias, the Trump administration just used a highly controversial legal maneuver to get her off the case. They claimed she was partial. While these claims had no real foundation, they are part of Trump’s continued, and long-term, play to delegitimize judicial power. Trump’s allegations of bias against Judge Boasberg have been particularly contentious, given that Boasberg’s rulings have not consistently favored the government, contradicting Trump’s narrative.
Trump’s attacks have gained traction with certain Republican members of Congress, including House Speaker Mike Johnson and Representative Jim Jordan, who echoed the former president’s sentiments. More broadly, this unusual alignment further illustrates the unfortunate habit of politicizing the judiciary and undermining respect for judicial processes.
The fuse was Trump’s executive orders. They hit specific plaintiffs’ law firms by depriving their security clearances and cutting off most of their government work. Such orders have resulted in significant and successful litigation challenges. Consequently, court rulings have not been kind to Trump’s administration. As a result, Trump has increasingly used social media platforms, including X, which he owns, to rally support for impeaching judges whose decisions he finds unfavorable.
Indeed, judicial safety has been an increasing concern since the start of Trump’s attack. Legal experts have noted that this kind of incendiary rhetoric endangers judges and their families as well. John Jones, a legal analyst, emphasized the dangerous implications of Trump’s statements:
“While the threats to impeach federal judges based on their decisions are largely performative, they are also designed to foment disrespect for the judiciary and the rule of law.” – John Jones
Jones also underscored that impeachment calls frequently from massive national campaigns, complete with personal information disclosures to undermine judges’ safety.
As retired Massachusetts judge Nancy Gertner weighed in on the larger impact of what Trump has done. She stated:
“Trump and Musk are playing with fire… They’re undermining bedrock constitutional principles.” – Nancy Gertner
She emphasized the principle that judges should not be targeted just because they are doing their jobs. Gertner noted:
“You can’t shut down a court just because you disagree. The judges have done nothing wrong or inconsistent with their oaths.” – Nancy Gertner
Beryl Howell, the judge targeted by Trump’s administration, commented:
“This strategy is designed to impugn the integrity of the federal judicial system and blame any loss on the decision-maker rather than fallacies in the substantive legal arguments presented.” – Beryl Howell
Trump’s rhetoric is more than just political grandstanding. It underscores a troubling trend that endangers the integrity of our judiciary and the respect for judicial independence itself. Chief Justice John Roberts condemned Trump’s calls for impeaching judges as detrimental to the rule of law:
“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.” – John Roberts
As tensions rise, some Republican lawmakers appear to be using judicial criticism as a tool for fundraising and political gain. Charlie Dent, a former congressman from Pennsylvania, noted that attacks on judges might serve as talking points for campaigns while detracting from serious governance:
“I think this is a talking point and a fundraising tool… they’ll try to monetize it for campaign purposes.” – Charlie Dent
Amidst this political landscape, former prosecutor Paul Rosenzweig warned that Trump’s efforts to discredit judicial figures reveal a strategic plan to disable all opposition. This approach takes a serious toll on the integrity of the judiciary and the public’s belief in its mission.
As lawmakers continue to wrestle with the fallout from Trump’s dangerous rhetoric, the threats to judges’ physical safety remain dire. Jones elaborated on this issue:
“Judges are rightly worried about their safety, and the measures in place to protect them may prove inadequate if the dangerous and irresponsible rhetoric from the Trump camp continues.” – John Jones
That’s an ongoing story, as Trump and his allies still push the boundaries on intimidating the judiciary. Further, their rhetoric chills individual judges from doing their jobs. It has opened up deep questions about the underlying condition of American democracy and our commitment to constitutional principles.