Over the past year, the United States has witnessed a relentless and coordinated attack on the judiciary, spearheaded by Trump and his allies at both the federal and state levels. These attacks—both rhetorical and legislative—aim to delegitimize judges, strip courts of their authority, and reshape the justice system into an arm of political power rather than an independent check on government overreach.
This assault is not isolated. It reflects a broader right-wing strategy to dismantle legal safeguards, mirroring efforts to remove reform-minded prosecutors, weaken judicial oversight, and concentrate power within the executive branch. The consequences could be catastrophic: a judiciary that no longer functions as a guardian of constitutional rights but as an enforcer of political ideology.
Federal Courts in the Crosshairs
From Trump’s White House to Congress and social media megaphones like Elon Musk, federal judges are being personally attacked and institutionally undermined for rulings that challenge key administration policies.
- After a judge blocked DOGE’s (Department of Government Efficiency) ability to access Treasury payment systems, Trump openly questioned whether judges should have the power to make such decisions at all.
- Vice President J.D. Vance took it further, suggesting the President could ignore court orders deemed “illegitimate,” a direct challenge to the principle of judicial review established in Marbury v. Madison.
- When courts ruled that the administration must restore health websites and unfreeze federal grant funding, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt accused judges of “abusing their power,” calling the judiciary itself a “constitutional crisis.”
- Elon Musk has fueled the fire, calling for judges to be impeached and even declaring that the U.S. is experiencing the “tyranny of the judiciary.” His attacks have escalated, branding specific judges as “evil,” “corrupt,” and “scammers” to his 200 million+ followers on X.
This campaign against the judiciary is not just talk—Republican lawmakers have introduced articles of impeachment against federal judges who ruled against Trump’s policies. While removal remains unlikely (requiring a two-thirds Senate vote), the chilling effect is clear: Judges may hesitate to rule against the administration, fearing political or even physical repercussions.
The real-world impact? Death threats against judges, intimidating deliveries to their homes, and heightened security measures from the U.S. Marshals Service. The judiciary is under siege, and the consequences are escalating.
Targeting Immigration Judges for Political Control
Immigration courts have long been politicized, as immigration judges are not independent Article III judges but DOJ employees. Under Trump, the Department of Justice has taken unprecedented steps to purge judges who don’t align with administration policies:
- At least 20 immigration judges have been fired without explanation, most likely because they were hired under President Biden.
- Another 18 judges were pressured into resigning under a deferred resignation offer.
- A new DOJ memo signals that immigration judges’ civil service protections may be revoked, meaning judges could be fired at will—potentially replaced with those who will rubber-stamp deportation orders.
With a backlog of 4 million immigration cases, removing judges will only paralyze the system further. A 2023 Congressional Research Report recommended hiring 300 additional judges to manage caseloads. Instead, Trump’s DOJ is doing the opposite: dismantling due process protections in immigration courts and packing the bench with ideological enforcers.
State Courts Face Political Retaliation
The assault on judicial independence is not confined to Washington, D.C. State courts—often overlooked—are experiencing an unprecedented level of legislative interference, financial retaliation, and direct attacks on judges.
Stripping Judicial Power
- Texas: A new bail bill passed in the Abbott-controlled Texas Senate seeks to punish judges for their bail decisions. Judges could face sanctions or even removal if their rulings do not align with the governor’s “tough-on-crime” agenda.
- Utah: Republican lawmakers, furious over state Supreme Court rulings on gerrymandering and abortion, have introduced at least eight bills aimed at stripping judicial independence. Proposals include allowing the governor to hand-pick top judges and putting legislators in charge of evaluating judicial decisions.
These efforts represent a calculated attempt to intimidate judges into compliance with political agendas rather than the rule of law.
Buying the Courts: The Billionaire Takeover
A dark-money-fueled push to control state judiciaries is unfolding in several battleground states.
Wisconsin: The Most Expensive Judicial Election in History
- Billionaires, including Elon Musk, have poured millions into a Wisconsin Supreme Court race, backing a MAGA-aligned candidate.
- The goal? To secure a justice who will rubber-stamp Trump-aligned policies and protect Musk’s financial interests in ongoing legal battles.
- Democratic candidate Susan Crawford has warned: “Elon Musk is trying to buy a seat on our Supreme Court so Brad Schimel can rubber-stamp his extreme agenda.”
Delaware: The “Billionaire’s Bill”
- After a Delaware judge struck down Musk’s $56 billion Tesla pay package, Musk retaliated by demanding radical judicial reforms in Delaware courts.
- State legislators are now pushing a pro-corporate bill that would gut judicial oversight, making it easier for billionaires to skirt corporate accountability.
Weaponizing the DOJ against Judges
The Trump administration is not just attacking judges—it’s using the Department of Justice to undermine judicial authority at the state level.
- Colorado: The DOJ has intervened in the state case of Tina Peters, a convicted Republican election denier who breached voting data systems.
- Since Peters’ crimes were state charges, Trump cannot pardon her—but his DOJ is pressuring courts to overturn her conviction.
- Even more disturbing: Trump’s allies are calling for the prosecution of the Colorado judge who sentenced Peters and threatening to withhold federal funding from the state until the governor pardons her.
- North Carolina: Republican Supreme Court candidate Jefferson Griffin refuses to concede after multiple recounts confirmed he lost. He is now asking the state court of appeals to throw out 65,000 votes—a judicial coup in the making.
