Federal Judges Criticize Supreme Court Deference to Trump Amid Rising Threats

A group of anonymous federal judges, appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents including President Donald Trump, have voiced strong criticism of the U.S. Supreme Court for frequently overturning lower court rulings in favor of the Trump administration with little or no explanation. They argue that the Supreme Court's use of emergency rulings undermines lower courts and leaves judges without clear guidance, contributing to a growing lack of trust in the judiciary. The judges also highlight a disturbing increase in violent threats against members of the judiciary, linked to controversial rulings involving the Trump administration, with over 400 investigations into threats reported in 2025 alone. Some judges expressed fear for their personal safety and warned that if the situation is not addressed, there could be fatal consequences. Additionally, there is concern that the Trump administration's approach involves filing numerous cases rapidly with little regard for constitutional norms, leading to judicial frustration and criticism from figures like Judge Zia Farriqui. While some judges acknowledge that political tensions, including what some call 'Trump derangement syndrome,' influence perceptions of the judiciary, the consensus calls for more transparency and rigor from the Supreme Court to support lower court judges and uphold judicial integrity.