The Rising Threats Against Judges Every Court Leader Should Know

Threats against judges in the United States have climbed sharply since 2022, and the danger no longer stays inside the courthouse. 

Federal data shows hundreds of judges targeted every year, two state judges have been killed at their own homes since 2022, and Congress is still working through legislation meant to close the distance between a threat and a response. For court administrators and court security directors, the numbers point to one conclusion: protection built around the building is no longer enough.

How Common Are Threats Against Judges?

The U.S. Marshals Service has tracked hundreds of threats against federal judges every year since fiscal year 2022, and the totals have stayed high every year since.

Source: U.S. Marshals Service, Protective Investigations Threat Statistics.

A single judge can appear in the count more than once if they are the subject of multiple investigations, which is why the “unique judges” column matters as much as the raw threat total. In fiscal 2025, 396 individual federal judges, roughly 1 in 7 of the nation’s approximately 2,700 active Article III judges, were the target of at least one documented threat.

What Judiciary Leaders Are Saying

Chief Justice John Roberts addressed the trend directly in his 2024 year-end report on the federal judiciary, describing a “significant uptick” in threats against judges. 

Judge Amy St. Eve, who chairs the Judicial Conference’s budget committee, told Congress that roughly 50 people have faced criminal charges for threatening judges in recent years, a figure she called “extremely worrying” given how it strains court security resources already stretched thin.

Judge safety has moved from a background concern to a line item that court leaders now have to defend in budget conversations, staffing plans, and facility upgrades.

Why Are Threats Against the Judiciary Increasing?

Threats have grown alongside three trends: more contentious rulings drawing public backlash, easier access to judges’ personal information, and harassment that travels faster than any courthouse can respond to it.

When Criticism Becomes Targeted Harassment

High-profile rulings, particularly ones covered heavily online, have drawn direct criticism aimed at individual judges rather than at the decisions themselves. 

Some of that criticism escalates into targeted harassment:

• Unsolicited deliveries sent to a judge’s home
• Threatening messages sent through personal accounts
• Family members named in online posts

Court security can screen who enters a building. It has no way to screen a comment section or a data broker site that still lists a judge’s home address.

Digital Exposure Makes Judges Easy to Find

A judge’s address, phone number, or relatives’ names are often just a few searches away on public record aggregator sites, the same sites that gave a stalker the information he needed to find Judge Esther Salas’s family in 2020.

The Daniel Anderl Case and Why It Still Shapes Judicial Security

In July 2020, a man with a case pending before U.S. District Judge Esther Salas showed up at her New Jersey home disguised as a delivery driver. He shot and killed her 20-year-old son, Daniel Anderl, and wounded her husband before taking his own life. He had found the family’s address through public records after growing angry over how his case was proceeding.

The attack led directly to the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act, signed into law in December 2022. 

What the Act Covers, and Where It Stops

The law addresses one real vulnerability: how easily a judge’s home can be found.

• What it does. Lets federal judges and their immediate family request that data brokers, government agencies, and other entities remove personal identifying information, including home addresses, from public-facing records.
• Who it covers. Federal judges. State judges, who make up the overwhelming majority of the judiciary, are not covered by it.
• What it cannot do. Change what happens in the seconds after someone finds a judge’s home anyway.

For a full breakdown of what the act covers and where its protections stop, see our earlier piece, Understanding the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act.

State and Federal Protections, and Where They Fall Short

Privacy law and new legislation both target information exposure. Neither one shortens the time it takes for help to reach a judge once a threat turns physical.

That distinction matters most for state judges, who make up the overwhelming majority of the judiciary and generally have fewer protections than their federal counterparts.

Beyond the Reach of Courtroom Security

Two recent cases make the exposure clear.

1. June 2022, Wisconsin. Retired judge John Roemer was shot and killed in his own home by a man he had sentenced years earlier.
2. October 2023, Maryland. Washington County Circuit Judge Andrew Wilkinson was shot in his driveway by a man involved in a custody case Wilkinson had ruled on.

Both men were killed off the bench, in their own homes, with no courtroom security officer anywhere nearby.

What Congress Is Doing Now

Congress has responded with the Countering Threats and Attacks on Our Judges Act (S. 2379, with a companion bill, H.R. 4602, in the House). The Senate passed it unanimously in November 2025.

The bill would create a State Judicial Threat Intelligence and Resource Center to give state and local courts the same kind of threat assessment support federal courts already receive from the Marshals Service. As of this writing, it is still waiting on House action.

None of this changes what a court security officer can do once a judge leaves the courthouse. Courtroom security stops at the door. Legislation and privacy protections are catching up to where the real risk sits, but they are not built to close the distance between a threat and a response.

The Core Problem in Judge Safety: The Time Between a Threat and a Response

A court security officer can reach an incident inside the courthouse in seconds. Once a judge walks to the parking garage, drives home, or answers their own front door, that layer of protection disappears.

Most personal safety options still assume a judge can see danger coming and work through a sequence of steps:

1. Recognize the threat
2. Reach for a phone
3. Unlock it
4. Open an app or the dialer
5. Speak to a dispatcher and describe a location

That sequence takes far longer than most people expect during an actual confrontation. Response time, not another statute or awareness campaign, is what determines how a threat against a judge ends.

Our earlier post, Why Federal Judges Are Speaking Out About Personal Safety, goes deeper into what happens to a judge’s protection the moment they step off the bench.

Where a Mobile Duress and GPS Alert System Fits in Court Security

A wearable duress device with GPS lets a judge send a silent, exact-location alert to dispatch in under a second, without unlocking a phone, opening an app, or making a sound.

That capability closes the distance courtroom security cannot cover:

• Chambers and non-public areas of the courthouse
• The parking garage and the walk to the car
• The commute home
• The front porch and the residence itself

A one-touch activation sends a precise location directly to a monitoring center or 911 dispatch, so responders know exactly where to go instead of working from a general address or a dropped call. For a judge already facing a credible threat, that speed is the difference between a documented incident and a preventable tragedy.

Frequently Asked Questions About Threats Against Judges

How common are threats against judges?

The U.S. Marshals Service recorded 564 threats against 396 federal judges in fiscal year 2025. Fiscal year 2026 was already at 402 threats against 299 judges through August 3, with nearly two months still remaining in the fiscal year.

Why are threats against the judiciary increasing?

Contentious rulings, wider public access to judges’ personal information, and harassment tactics like doxxing and threats sent to a judge’s home have all contributed to what Chief Justice John Roberts called a “significant uptick” in his 2024 year-end report on the federal judiciary.

What is being done to protect judges?

Federal judges can request removal of personal information from public records under the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act. The Senate has passed the Countering Threats and Attacks on Our Judges Act, which would extend federal-level threat assessment resources to state and local courts once the House acts on it.

How fast can help reach a judge during a duress event?

That depends on how the alert is sent. A phone call requires unlocking a device, opening it, and speaking, seconds a judge in danger may not have. A dedicated duress device with GPS sends a silent, location-tagged alert directly to dispatch the moment it is pressed, with no need to unlock, open, or speak.

Judge Safety Doesn’t End at the Bench

Court security covers the building. Judges need protection that goes with them everywhere else, chambers, the garage, the commute, and home. Schedule a demo of Centurion Anywhere to see how a wearable duress and GPS alert system protects judges and court staff beyond the courtroom.