Last week, Congress did not act upon a new piece of legislation, the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act of 2020, created to protect judges and their families from violence and murder. The proposed bill would significantly enhance the protection and privacy of justices across the US and was considered briefly by Congress but was put aside without comment until 2021.
The bill is named after Daniel Anderl, 20, who was gunned down at his front door by a litigant who had appeared before Anderl’s mother, New Jersey District Judge Esther Salas, a few months before the July attack.
The murderer also shot and wounded Salas’ husband, who received severe injuries. Salas, who was not near the front door, was unharmed physically.
The assailant simply looked up the family home address on the internet, then posed as a delivery person and rang the doorbell. When college student Anderl answered, he was shot and killed.
This new legislation will hide personal information about justices and court staff from the general public to avoid such murders and violence.
Violent incidents and threats against judges are steadily growing. In 2015 there were 926 such attacks or threats reported to the US Marshall Service, and in 2019 that number jumped significantly to 4,449 incidents. In two cases of violence, such as in the Salas family murder, judges' relatives have been murdered at their own homes.
A critical atmosphere and public outing of Judges’ names by President Donald Trump has been ongoing for years. Trump has attacked justices and courts on his social media and in interviews, alluding to conspiracy theories and rigged courts. At the same time, untold numbers of his millions of followers consider him to be speaking facts and not opinions.
Even now, with over 60 courts ruling there is no evidence of any fraud in the presidential election vote counts, Trump and his minions are still demanding, against all factual proof, that Trump stays in office while claiming that the election was rigged.
Justices have received strongly worded and non-factual negative press from the White House, especially due to President Donald Trump’s onslaught of Twitter posts, where he has 88,575,606 followers.
Trump’s pattern of attacking judges includes numerous tweets, from as early as 2016, such as his calling out Chief Justice John Roberts after an asylum ruling.
“Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have “Obama judges,” and they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country," wrote Trump. “It would be great if the 9th Circuit was indeed an “independent judiciary…”
Trump’s attacks upon justices by name have been frequent, including demanding that U.S. Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg recuse themselves for cases that included him at all times. After the Roger Stone case, in a tweet on February 20, 2020, Trump wrote, “Sotomayor accuses GOP appointed Justices of being biased in favor of Trump. This is a terrible thing to say. Trying to “shame” some into voting her way? She never criticized Justice Ginsberg when she called me a “faker.” Both should recuse themselves.”
Then, on February 25, Trump tweeted, “There has rarely been a juror so tainted as the forewoman in the Roger Stone case. Look at her background. She never revealed her hatred of “Trump” and Stone. She was totally biased, as is the judge. Roger wasn’t even working on my campaign. Miscarriage of justice. Sad to watch!”
James C. Duff, Director of the Administrative Office of the US Courts, said he was upset the new legislation was not approved but hopeful it would be passed in early 2021.
“It is disappointing that this critical legislation, which enjoys bipartisan support in both the House and the Senate, did not obtain the unanimous consent required to pass the Senate in this busy lame-duck period,” said Duff. “Nevertheless, we are extremely grateful to those who have supported this bill and fully expect it to be taken up at the start of the next session of Congress. The nation’s judges depend on it.”
A unanimous ruling from a three-judge panel upheld a prior, lower court’s decision that former President Trump’s White House records can be shared with the January 6 Capitol riot committee. The federal D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied Trump’s bid to stop the release of sections of his White House... Read More »
The Supreme Court has given judges the power to deny bail if a person under arrest continues to pose a threat to an individual or the community. A federal judge exercised her power to keep one of the Capitol rioters in detention because certain members of the media, legislators and... Read More »
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away Friday evening, September 18, 2020, after serving nearly three decades on the nation’s highest court. Known affectionately as the “Notorious RBG,” she left an immediate wake of grief among her most ardent supporters and ideological opponents alike—but the aftermath of Ginsburg’s... Read More »
If Joe Biden were to secure the presidency, he would face a scene not unlike President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s late-1930s America. The nostalgic similarities have some wondering if a Biden presidency, too, might seek to rework the lifetime-tenured, nine-Justice stalwarts of the U.S. Supreme Court. In the shadow of the... Read More »
