Federal judges across the United States say their lives have been fundamentally altered by a surge in harassment, threats, and intimidation after issuing rulings against President Donald Trump or speaking publicly in defense of judicial independence. What was once a largely abstract concern about security has, for many, become a daily reality involving police visits, home surveillance upgrades, and fear for family members.
For John Coughenour, an 84-year-old senior U.S. district judge in Seattle, the shift was stark. In nearly 45 years on the federal bench, he had presided over high-profile criminal cases and navigated moments of risk. But earlier this year, after ruling against the Trump administration, he did something he had not considered in decades: he retrieved a gun he once kept locked away at the courthouse and brought it home.
“I’m not a gun nut,” Coughenour said in an interview. “But given what’s happened, I have armed myself.”
The threats began shortly after Coughenour blocked an executive order aimed at limiting birthright citizenship, calling the proposal “blatantly unconstitutional.” The ruling, issued just days after Trump returned to office, made Coughenour the first judge to halt the policy, which is now before the Supreme Court of the United States.
That same day, Trump publicly singled him out. “They put it before a certain judge in Seattle, I guess,” Trump said in the Oval Office. “And there’s no surprises with that judge.”
Within days, Coughenour was “swatted” — a dangerous hoax in which someone falsely reports an emergency to prompt an armed police response. An anonymous caller claimed the judge had barricaded himself inside his home and murdered his wife. Another report warned of a bomb in his mailbox. Law enforcement quickly determined both threats were fake, but the message was unmistakable.
Coughenour is not alone. NBC News interviews with sitting and former judges reveal a pattern of intimidation that has forced many to change how they live. One judge moved homes after a high-profile ruling. Another froze credit cards following a security breach. Several judges have altered driving routes, upgraded home security systems, and urged family members to limit their online presence.
“You alter your lifestyle and try to encourage your family to do the same,” said Stephen Bough, a Kansas City-based judge who ruled against the Trump administration’s attempt to deport five Missouri college students. Soon after his decision, Bough received unsolicited pizza deliveries in the middle of the night — a tactic judges increasingly see as a form of intimidation. His daughter, who lives 800 miles away in Atlanta, also received a delivery.
“The message is, ‘We know where you live. We know where your family lives,’” Bough said.
The United States Marshals Service, responsible for protecting judges, has noted a sharp rise in such incidents. According to agency data, there were 564 threats against judges in fiscal year 2025 alone, with more than 130 already recorded since October. Chief Justice John Roberts previously warned that threats against judges have tripled over the past decade.
Some judges say the rhetoric coming from the administration has contributed to the climate. Trump officials and allies have described adverse rulings as a “judicial coup,” while Attorney General Pam Bondi has referred to “low-level leftist judges.” Influencers aligned with the MAGA movement have openly called for impeachment of judges who block the administration’s agenda.
“The things they say and the descriptions they use — I blame them for stirring this stuff up,” Coughenour said.
The White House disputes that characterization. Spokeswoman Abigail Jackson defended the administration’s criticism of judges, arguing that it reflects legitimate disagreements rather than incitement. “Any implication that sharing the truth is akin to making threats is deeply unserious,” she said in a statement. “The Trump Administration cares deeply for the safety of all members of the Judicial Branch.”
Yet the consequences on the ground are difficult to ignore. Esther Salas, who lost her son in a 2020 attack at her home by a disgruntled lawyer, says the recent wave of intimidation has been particularly painful. After speaking out this year in defense of judges, she was notified of a security breach and had to cancel her credit cards. Attempts were also made to send pizzas to her former addresses, she said.
“These bad actors continue to use my murdered son’s name to inflict fear,” Salas said, referring to reports that some deliveries were ordered in her late son’s name. “It’s important for us to speak out against this violence and intimidation.”
The intimidation has also taken on an international dimension. Judges told NBC News that the Marshals Service suspects some incidents — particularly the coordinated pizza deliveries — may involve foreign actors. Cybersecurity expert Ron Zayas said his firm identified patterns suggesting Russia-linked online groups amplified the harassment. “It’s a way to destabilize,” Zayas said, though he cautioned that the evidence is not definitive.
Despite the growing risks, judges overwhelmingly say the Marshals Service is doing what it can with limited resources. Courthouses remain secure, but home protection is more difficult unless a specific, credible threat is identified.
Beyond immediate safety concerns, judges worry about the long-term implications for the justice system. “Judges signed up to be neutral arbiters of the law,” Bough said. “When you have to worry about the safety of your spouse and children, that changes the entire dynamic.”
For Coughenour, the danger to democracy looms larger than the danger to himself. “I’m 84 years old,” he said. “Threats against my life expectancy are kind of hollow. I’m more concerned that our democracy is at risk because of the trends against the rule of law.”
