NYU’s Rule of Law Lab and Berkeley Judicial Institute Document Surging Threats to the Independence of the Federal Judiciary

August 31, 2026 – The Rule of Law Lab at New York University School of Law, in collaboration with the Berkeley Judicial Institute at UC Berkeley Law School, today issued new research comprehensively documenting structural threats to the independence of the federal judiciary. It is the first known academic study of its kind.

Drawing upon thirty-four interviews with an equal number of federal judges appointed by presidents of both major political parties and research of publicly available materials, the report assesses the four categories of threats to judicial independence identified in Chief Justice John Roberts’ Year-End Report in 2024: violence and threats of violence, intimidation, disinformation, and defiance of lawfully entered judgments. 

Based on the interviews and data, the joint report, titled “Threats to the Independence of the Federal Judiciary” finds that such attacks have escalated sharply in recent years, with a further increase since 2025. Judges interviewed for the study consistently identified public officials’ ad hominem attacks on judges, and the amplification of such attacks on social media, as factors contributing significantly to this trend.

"The tension between free speech and attacks on an independent judiciary is not new. What is new is the volume, intensity, and character of today’s attacks on judges and courts, and the increasing willingness of public officials to blur the line between free speech in service of robust political debate and conduct that undermines the rule of law,” said retired United States District Judge Jeremy Fogel, Executive Director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute at UC Berkeley Law. 

Beginning in early 2025, federal judges appointed by presidents of both major political parties witnessed a new form of intimidation sometimes referred to as “pizza doxxing”—the anonymous delivery of unsolicited pizzas to their homes and their family members’ homes. Many of the pizzas were delivered in the name of the son of United States District Judge Esther Salas, Daniel Anderl, who was murdered in 2020 by a disgruntled attorney who had appeared before the judge. 

Although threats of violence, “pizza-doxxing,” “doxxing” (publicizing judges’ personal information) and “swatting” (falsely reporting crimes to draw a law enforcement reforms) directed at federal judges are prohibited by federal criminal statutes, the study finds that they are rarely prosecuted. The study also notes that the United States Marshals Service, the agency in charge of federal judicial security, is under-staffed and underfunded. Marshals Service budgets have not kept pace with the current threat environment.

“The threats against federal judges aren’t just partisan noise. They’re causing real harm to real people, and many of our interviews describe that harm in detail. Federal judges have continued to uphold their oath to the Constitution, but the norms that have long protected judicial independence cannot and should not be taken for granted. For the constitutional order to hold, for the rule of law to endure, this moment requires urgent, sustained attention from public officials, the legal community, and the public alike,” said Amrit Singh, Professor of Practice and Faculty Director of the Rule of Law Lab at NYU School of Law and lead author of the report.

In response, the study provides the following recommendations to safeguard judicial independence: 

• Public officials across the political spectrum should refrain from efforts to intimidate federal judges.
• Congress should take active measures to support an independent federal judiciary, including by ensuring sufficient funding for the Marshals Service.
• The federal government should adequately investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute threats against federal judges.
• States and U.S. territories should enact laws to sufficiently protect federal judges’ personal identifying information.
• Bar associations and lawyers should take affirmative steps to defend judicial independence.
• Sitting and retired judges should engage in appropriate public education.
• Legislative bodies, bar associations, and courts should expand civic education programs.
• The United States Marshals Service, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, and agencies involved in ensuring and assessing judicial security should collect and publicly disclose reliable data relating to threats, investigations, and prosecutions.

To read the full report, visit: www.law.nyu.edu/rule-law-lab/threats-federal-judiciary

---

Contact: ruleoflawlab@law.nyu.edu 

About the Rule of Law Lab at NYU Law
The Rule of Law Lab is a non-partisan institute which studies and deploys legal tools—legal research, documentation, litigation, and advocacy—in close collaboration with local practitioners and academics to protect democracy and the rule of law around the world. Learn more: https://www.law.nyu.edu/rule-law-lab/ 

About the Berkeley Judicial Institute at UC Berkeley Law
The Berkeley Judicial Institute (BJI)’s mission is to build bridges between judges and academics and to promote an ethical, resilient and independent judiciary. Learn more: https://www.law.berkeley.edu/research/bji/