Threats against judges in Trump travel ban lead to increased security: report

Threats against judges in Trump travel ban lead to increased security: report
© Getty Images

Multiple judges involved in the legal challenges against President Trump’s executive order on immigration and refugees have received threats that have warranted an increase in security protection, according to a new report.

CNN reported that the U.S. Marshals Service and local law enforcement have temporarily increased protective services for some of the judges involved in the legal cases.

The report did not specify which judges were being threatened. The Marshals Service did not comment on the specific threats, CNN said, noting: “We do not discuss our specific security measures. We continuously review the security measures in place for federal judges and take appropriate steps to provide additional protection when it is warranted.”


The report follows the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals's unanimous decision on Thursday to reject the Trump administration’s request to resume the travel ban. The court ruled that the nationwide restraining order against Trump’s ban can continue while a federal judge considers a lawsuit over the order. The ruling may be appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The report of increased security follows the president’s own criticism of judges.

Trump’s initial criticism came against U.S. District Judge James Robart, who temporarily halted Trump’s executive order, and whom Trump referred to as a “so-called judge.” 

“If something happens blame him and court system,” Trump tweeted following the ruling.

But an aide to Trump on the Supreme Court said it was a “huge stretch” to say Trump’s criticisms would be equated to a threat to any judge’s security.

"President Trump is not threatening a judge, and he's not encouraging any form of lawlessness," the adviser, Leonard Leo, said. "What he is doing is criticizing a judge for what he believes to be a failure to follow the law properly."

"Judges are given life tenure so they can go wherever the law takes them knowing that they can resist being unduly influenced by criticism or by praise," he said, according to CNN, noting that "all the way back to Thomas Jefferson, there has been criticisms by Presidents as well as (the) general public."