The killing of Charlie Kirk prompted Republicans to not only boost funding for lawmakers’ own security in the latest government funding bill, but also spend millions more to protect the federal judiciary — where U.S. Marshals have investigated over 500 threats made against 364 individual judges in the past year.
The proposed funding increase comes as nearly 50 former federal judges published an open letter on Wednesday, warning against threats to judicial independence. Several told NOTUS the recent political rhetoric around judges has threatened their personal safety. The effort is brought by Keep Our Republic’s Article III Coalition, which was formed earlier this year to “protect the independence of the judiciary.”
President Donald Trump himself has called judges “incompetent,” “crooked,” “USA hating” and “monsters” — and his administration even sued every federal district judge in Maryland for blocking immigration officials from deporting migrants without due process.
Criticism against the judiciary “is not new to this administration. What is new is the volume and also the rhetoric that’s attendant to it,” said retired federal Judge Liam O’Grady, a George W. Bush appointee who signed the letter. “I don’t want you to believe that this is all brand new, it’s continuing rhetoric that now has reached levels that are unprecedented.”
“We are living in an era of great physical, personal, individual danger to judges,” said retired federal Judge Andre Davis, another signee and Bill Clinton and Barack Obama appointee. “Part of that danger arises from the kind of rhetoric, unwarranted, in the criticism of judges and the name-calling” that could lead “people in the country to think that it really is an us-against the-judges kind of thing.”
House Republicans on Tuesday unveiled their short-term continuing resolution to fund the federal government until Nov. 21. The proposal includes $28 million “for the protection of Supreme Court justices” and $30 million for the Marshals Service (the Justice Department agency that protects the federal judiciary) “to carry out protective operations.” A White House official confirmed to NOTUS that the additional funding came as a request from the White House in the wake of Kirk’s death.
The letter from the former judges did not specifically address the need for more money to go toward security, but did warn that continued “fiery rhetoric” could lead to more threats.
“We are now compelled to speak out, as sitting judges cannot, because the Constitution is under attack,” the judges, appointed by both Democrats and Republicans, wrote in the letter. “Sitting judges, bound by a code of ethics, can only speak sparingly through their opinions. We are no longer so constrained.”
“Misinformation, disinformation, and fiery rhetoric distort public understanding of the judiciary’s critical role in maintaining our democracy,” the letter continues. “Threats against judges and their families are obvious attempts to intimidate, harass, and pressure judges and sway their opinions, shaking the public’s trust and confidence in the courts.”
Keep Our Republic’s Article III Coalition plans to start a civic education effort where judges will travel to Georgia, Pennsylvania and Colorado to speak to audiences about the rule of law in an effort to demystify the courts.
Sitting judges have, for years, asked Congress for an increase in funding for security. Back in April, Judge Robert J. Conrad Jr., secretary of the U.S. Judiciary’s Judicial Conference, sent a letter to top House appropriators warning that the entire federal judiciary was underfunded and judges were concerned about how to best address security.
“We have significant concerns about our ability to properly secure federal courthouses given current resource levels,” Conrad wrote in the letter.
While the Judicial Conference had requested $797 million for court security in December, an increase was not addressed in Congress’ March continuing resolution, and funding for court security remained at $750 million.
“Consecutive years of flat security funding comes at a time when threats against federal judges and courthouses are escalating, making this situation unsustainable in the current environment,” Conrad’s letter continued.
The Judicial Conference did not respond to NOTUS’ request for comment on the $58 million in security funding in House Republicans’ spending bill. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries told reporters he was unsure whether the Judicial Conference “has identified that number as what’s appropriate.”
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts in June warned about anti-judge rhetoric: “If you have somebody who’s expressing a high degree of hostility to the court, on whatever basis … the danger, of course, is somebody might pick up on that.”
“And we have had, of course, serious threats of violence and murder of judges just simply for doing their work,” Roberts continued.
House Republicans say they support increasing security for judges, including members who have loudly criticized judges for ruling against Trump.
Rep. Andy Ogles used to have a “wanted” poster outside of his office with pictures of judges, and has called to impeach judges based on their rulings. In March, House Democrats urged Ogles to take the poster down, but he refused, posting a video on X saying that judges needed to be held accountable. (The congressman did not clarify when or why the poster had been removed, but added that the poster was now hanging inside his office).
He told NOTUS that he did not see how his criticism of the judiciary could lead to an increase in threats.
“It’s one thing for me to disagree on policy and procedure, but I would never call for anyone to be harmed,” Ogles told NOTUS. “That’s absolutely unacceptable.”