Federal Judges Face Rising Threats Amid Political Rhetoric; Court Rulings Spark Market Reactions

A sharp increase in threats against federal judges has alarmed the judiciary and law enforcement, as new data from the U.S. Marshals Service reveals a dramatic spike in incidents. Between March and mid-April 2025, 162 judges were threatened—a surge that followed an already elevated rate, with 80 judges targeted in the five months prior. By late May, the total number of judges threatened this fiscal year reached 277, representing nearly one-third of the federal judiciary. This escalation has been closely linked to inflammatory political rhetoric, with President Trump and his administration frequently criticizing judges who rule against their policies and, in some cases, calling for their impeachment.

Judges have expressed deep concern about their safety and that of their families, urging political leaders to temper their rhetoric. The situation is further complicated by fears that the White House could use its control over federal law enforcement to reduce protections for the judiciary. In recent weeks, threats have included not only violent online posts but also real-world harassment, such as doxxing and unsolicited deliveries referencing the 2020 murder of Judge Esther Salas’s son.

Court Rulings and Market Impact

Amid this climate, a panel of federal judges ruled that President Trump exceeded his authority by imposing sweeping tariffs, a decision that led to a rally in global stocks and a stronger U.S. dollar against major currencies. The ruling was seen as a check on executive power and a potential boost for international trade confidence.

However, in a reversal that underscores the volatility of legal and policy battles, an appeals court overturned a federal judge’s order that had halted Trump’s tariffs. This decision marked a significant victory for the administration’s trade agenda and may have contributed to ongoing market fluctuations as investors react to shifting trade policy signals.

Judicial Hiring Controversy

In another development, a judicial complaint regarding federal judges’ decisions not to hire law clerks from Columbia University was dismissed. The complaint had raised concerns about judges leveraging their authority to influence private institutions, but the dismissal suggests that such hiring practices remain largely within judicial discretion.

Broader Implications

The confluence of rising threats against judges and high-stakes court rulings highlights growing tensions between the judiciary and the executive branch. With threats now affecting not just judges but also their families, and with court decisions having immediate market and policy impacts, the independence and security of the judiciary are under unprecedented scrutiny. The situation has prompted calls for increased security measures and renewed debates about the role of political rhetoric in undermining public trust in the courts.