WASHINGTON, D.C. — The American Bar Association is sounding alarm bells over the rising number of political attacks against judges and courts in the United States, warning that such actions threaten the independence of the judiciary and the stability of democratic institutions.
In her latest piece published in the ABA Criminal Justice Magazine, titled “The Judiciary Is Under Attack,” legal scholar Jessica Brand writes that efforts to target judges at both the federal and state levels are becoming increasingly brazen and politically driven.
According to Brand, attacks on the courts can no longer be viewed simply as criticism of judicial decisions. Instead, she argues, they are aimed at intimidating judges, eroding judicial authority and weakening the system of checks and balances in American government. She warns that these developments pose serious risks to democracy in the United States.
Brand cites multiple examples of state-level actions that may threaten judicial independence. One example occurred recently in Texas, where lawmakers introduced new grounds for judicial dismissal while simultaneously approving pay raises for judges. According to Brand, such measures make judges more vulnerable to political pressure when their decisions conflict with those in power.
Moreover, according to the ABA article, attacks against the judiciary may harm democracy as a whole. Brand argues that weakening judicial independence opens the door to voter suppression, attacks on local officials and violations of constitutional limits on executive and legislative power.
Concerns about judicial independence have continued to grow nationally amid broader political tensions involving the judiciary, law firms and the legal profession.
As recently reported by Reuters, John Roberts expressed concern about growing perceptions of the Supreme Court of the United States as a political body rather than an independent institution. According to Roberts, attacks on judges and declining public confidence in the judiciary pose a serious threat to the legal system.
Additionally, the ABA has issued several statements addressing personal attacks against judges and justices. In March 2023, then-ABA President Michelle Behnke warned that hostility directed toward members of the judiciary had become dangerous and stressed that judicial independence must be preserved despite disagreements with judicial decisions.
Legal organizations and scholars now argue that attacks against judges are part of a broader effort to consolidate political power and undermine the judicial system as a whole.
The ABA’s March 2026 Human Rights publication, titled “Democracy Imperiled,” states that the independence of the federal judiciary is under an “unprecedented threat” because of political intimidation, attacks on judges and the weakening of legal restraints on executive authority.
Furthermore, tensions between the judiciary and political institutions have expanded to include disputes involving courthouse operations, legal representation and the institutional authority of the courts themselves.
Reuters also reported that earlier this year, the federal judiciary asked Congress for greater authority over courthouse management after warning that the court system was facing a “crisis” tied to deteriorating infrastructure and conflicts with the executive branch.
The ABA has also condemned attacks on lawyers and law firms representing plaintiffs in politically sensitive cases. According to previous ABA reports, punitive actions against attorneys and firms may undermine the rule of law by making it more difficult for lawyers to challenge government actions in court.
The independence of the judiciary has also become a concern for international observers. This year, advocacy organizations identified the United States as a focus of the “International Day of the Endangered Lawyer,” citing intimidation directed at judges and attorneys.
According to critics, the rise in political attacks against the judiciary reflects a broader democratic crisis in which courts are increasingly viewed as partisan obstacles rather than independent institutions.
Supporters of stronger judicial protections acknowledge that criticism of judicial decisions remains a democratic right. Nevertheless, they argue that threats, intimidation and politically motivated retaliation against judges pose a serious danger to the judicial system.
Finally, the ABA article stresses the importance of preserving judicial independence to protect civil rights, voting rights and the ability of courts to restrain government misconduct.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
