US Judge Fighting Trump's Orders Reveals Menacing Tactic Being Used to Silence Her and Other Judges

US Federal Judge Beryl Howell has revealed an orchestrated campaign of intimidation targeting members of the judiciary who rule against Trump administration policies, warning that judicial independence faces an unprecedented threat.

Speaking publicly for the first time about the threats she has received, Judge Howell described how her decision to block parts of President Trump's executive order against law firm Perkins Coie has led to security concerns affecting both her professional and personal life.

Who Is Speaking Out: Howell Leads Judicial Resistance

'What we're experiencing goes beyond disagreement with our rulings—it's an attempt to control judicial outcomes through fear,' Judge Howell told reporters yesterday. 'The pattern is unmistakable and deeply concerning.'

The Washington DC district judge ruled on 12 March that Trump's executive order against Perkins Coie 'runs head-on into the wall of first amendment protections'.

Since then, she has required enhanced security measures after receiving what she described as 'credible threats'.

Three-tier Intimidation Strategy

Several other federal judges have now come forward to corroborate Judge Howell's account, though most requested anonymity due to security concerns. They describe a three-tiered intimidation strategy: public criticism from President Trump, amplification by billionaire Elon Musk to his social media followers, and subsequent threats requiring security interventions.

One judge, speaking on condition of anonymity, recounted finding armed guards outside their home after ruling against a deportation order. 'My staff are afraid to come to work. This isn't normal political criticism—it's a deliberate attempt to undermine the judiciary.'

The controversy escalated dramatically last month when Trump suggested a top Washington DC judge should be impeached for blocking the deportation of Venezuelans.

'Threat to Judicial Independence'

The unprecedented attack prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to issue a rare statement defending judicial independence.

'Judicial decisions must be respected even when controversial,' Roberts wrote, adding that 'intimidation of judges undermines the rule of law itself.'

Harvard law lecturer and retired Massachusetts judge Nancy Gertner called the situation 'the most serious threat to judicial independence in modern American history'.

'These aren't isolated incidents—it's a systematic campaign to make judges fear personal consequences for their rulings,' said Gertner, who has spoken with numerous affected judges.

The intimidation has extended beyond the judges themselves. A bomb threat was reported against Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett's sister after Barrett joined a majority opinion against Trump's interests. Judge Paul Engelmayer faced protesters outside his Manhattan residence after blocking Musk's 'Department of Government Efficiency' from accessing Treasury records.

Columbia law professor and former federal prosecutor Daniel Richman confirmed the scale of the problem. 'The sheer vindictiveness with which Trump and his allies have targeted judges has disrupted lives, inflicted costs and even raised security concerns,' he said.

Democracy in Peril

The affected judges describe a clear turning point in March, when Trump addressed Justice Department staff with a speech labelling legal opponents 'bad people, really bad people'.

According to multiple judges, threats increased dramatically following the speech.
In response, a growing coalition of current and former judges has begun coordinating efforts to protect judicial independence.

Former federal judge John Jones, now president of Dickinson College, is helping organise support for targeted colleagues.

'When judges face threats for simply doing their jobs—interpreting and applying the law—democracy itself is in peril,' Jones warned.

Judge Howell highlighted the coordinated nature of the attacks. 'First comes the ruling, then the presidential condemnation, then the social media amplification, then the impeachment threat, and finally, the personal security concerns,' she said.

In Congress, Republican allies have introduced formal impeachment resolutions against judges who ruled against administration policies, a move legal experts describe as unprecedented.

Congressman Jamie Raskin, a former constitutional law professor, met recently with concerned judges and offered a stark assessment: 'We're witnessing an unprecedented assault on judicial independence. When judges cannot rule without fear of retribution, we've lost the independent judiciary our founders established.'

The White House has not responded to requests for comment on the judges' allegations.

A spokesperson for Elon Musk denied any coordinated campaign, describing his social media posts as 'legitimate criticism of judicial overreach'.

Judge Howell concluded her remarks with a direct appeal: 'The independence of the judiciary is not a partisan issue. It's fundamental to our constitutional system. We took an oath to uphold the law without fear or favour, and that's exactly what we intend to do.'