State Judges Turn to Guns in New Era of Judicial Threats

A New York Times investigation has uncovered a disturbing trend of thousands of threats, assaults, and fatal attacks targeting state judges across the United States in recent years, revealing that many judges are turning to personal firearms for protection because local law enforcement agencies are often unable to provide adequate security. The report, published in early 2024, highlights a new era of heightened danger for the judiciary, driven by increasing political polarization, high-profile cases, and the ease of online harassment, which has left judges feeling vulnerable both at work and at home. The examination details a significant rise in credible threats, ranging from mailed death threats and social media harassment to physical assaults and, in the most extreme cases, fatal attacks like the 2020 shooting at the home of a federal judge in New Jersey. State judges, who handle the vast majority of cases in the U.S., are particularly exposed as they often work in courthouses with minimal security and live in communities where their addresses can be publicly accessible. Many judges interviewed described a constant state of anxiety, with some altering their daily routines, installing home security systems, and, increasingly, obtaining concealed carry permits and firearms for self-defense. This shift toward self-reliance underscores a systemic failure in judicial protection. While federal judges receive protection from the U.S. Marshals Service, state judges typically depend on county sheriffs or local police, whose resources are often stretched thin. The Times found that many local agencies lack specialized units for judicial security and struggle to respond effectively to the volume of threats. Consequently, the burden of safety is falling on the judges themselves, raising ethical and practical concerns about the impact on judicial independence and the fair administration of justice when judges must fear for their personal safety.