In a concerted effort to shed light on the increasingly perilous conditions facing the federal judiciary, NYU Law’s Rule of Law Lab and the Berkeley Judicial Institute recently unveiled a groundbreaking report, “Threats to the Independence of the Federal Judiciary.” This detailed analysis, based on interviews conducted with 34 federal judges between October 2025 and July 2026, paints a stark portrait of a judiciary under siege.

The findings, though unsurprising to those familiar with the judicial landscape, are nonetheless alarming: judges across the United States are grappling with an uptick in threats, harassment, and a barrage of disinformation campaigns. The situation has deteriorated to the point where the very nature of judicial duties is evolving under the strain.

Judges are traditionally reticent about such challenges, but the urgency of the situation has pushed many to voice their concerns openly. They report an array of hostile tactics aimed at undermining their authority, including "swatting" incidents, where false emergencies are reported at their homes, and disturbing threats of violence. These attacks are not just personal affronts but also threaten the bedrock of judicial independence.

The companion report by the Brennan Center underscores the gravity of the situation, revealing a disturbing trend of defying court orders and maligning the judiciary. High-profile incidents, such as the targeting of judges like Esther Salas, whose son was tragically murdered, and Ana Reyes, who received death threats over her rulings, spotlight the dire circumstances.

Amidst these challenges, the report calls for a robust defense of judicial independence, not from the judges—who are bound by strict ethical constraints—but from the legal community at large. The response, however, has been tepid. Recent failures, such as the Florida Bar's refusal to investigate egregious comparisons of federal judges to criminals by a DHS lawyer, signal a troubling reluctance within the legal profession to confront these issues head-on.

The implications extend beyond the judiciary. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has been criticized for its handling of cases and its apparent attempts to stifle dissent within the legal community. This includes pressure on legal firms to align with certain political causes, a strategy that has seen substantial compliance from major law firms.

The stakes are high, and the report is a clarion call for the legal community to step up and protect the independence of the judiciary. As the threats mount, the need for a united and forceful response becomes ever more critical. Judges and legal professionals alike must navigate these troubled waters to safeguard the principles of justice and rule of law.