Threats By Trump Supporters To Judge Are Fueling Concerns About Democracy

Hundreds of federal judges face the same task every day: reviewing an affidavit filed by federal agents and approving search warrant requests. But for U.S. District Judge Bruce Rinehart, the fallout from his decision to approve a search warrant was anything but routine. He has faced a barrage of death threats since his signature cleared the way for the FBI to search former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate as part of an investigation into whether he improperly removed sensitive materials from the White House. Reinhart’s home address was published on right-wing websites, along with anti-Semitic slurs. The South Florida synagogue he attends canceled Friday night Shabbat services after the commotion. Trump has done little to cool the temperature among his supporters, denouncing the investigation as political prosecution and calling on Reinhart to recuse himself from the case because he has made political donations to Democrats in the past. However, Reinhart also contributed to the Republicans. The threats against Reinhart are part of a broader attack on law enforcement, particularly the FBI, by Trump and his allies following the investigation. But experts warn that the focus on one judge, which comes amid an increase in threats to the judiciary in general, is dangerous to the rule of law in the US and the country’s viability as a democracy. “Threats against judges carrying out their constitutional responsibilities strike at the core of our democracy,” said Associate US Judge Richard J. Sullivan, chairman of the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Security, in a statement issued recently after the investigation. “Judges should not fear retaliation for doing their job.” A phone message left at Reinhart’s chambers was not immediately returned. He will preside over the hearing Thursday at the request of media organizations, including the Associated Press, seeking to unseal the underlying affidavit filed by the Justice Department when it sought the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago. Asked to comment on the measures it has taken to protect Reinhart and his family, the US Marshals Service said in a statement: “While we do not discuss our specific security measures, we are constantly reviewing the measures in place and taking appropriate steps to provide protection as necessary ensures the integrity of the federal judicial process.” The vitriol directed at the judge, while impressive, is becoming increasingly common. In 2014, the US Marshals Service handled 768 incidents of what it described as “inappropriate communications” targeting judges and court officials. Last year, it reported more than 4,500. At some point “almost everyone recognized how inappropriate it was to threaten the life or safety of a judge because of a disagreement with the judge’s decision,” said Barbara Lynn, chief judge for the Northern District of Texas. “Now I think there are a lot of people who don’t think there’s anything wrong with it.” Lynn is one of several judicial officials pushing Congress to pass the Daniel Aderle bill, named after the 20-year-old son of District Judge Esther Salas. He was killed in 2020 when a gunman came to their home in New Jersey. His father was injured. The bill, which has the support of groups ranging from the American Bar Association to the National Association of Attorneys General, would keep more of judges’ personal information private. In June, a retired Wisconsin county judge, John Romer, was killed in his home in a targeted killing by a gunman who was also fatally wounded. Later that month, protesters gathered at the homes of conservative US Supreme Court justices after they overturned a 49-year-old ruling that women have a constitutional right to have an abortion. Police arrested a man with knives, zip ties and a gun near the home of Judge Brett Kavanaugh and said he planned to kill the conservative justice. Congress quickly approved money to beef up security at the judges’ homes and provide 24-hour protection for their families. The increased targeting of judges comes as trust in public institutions plummets and partisan rhetoric escalates. It’s part of a pattern that Steven Levitsky has seen before. “This is a classic harbinger of a democratic collapse,” said Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and co-author of How Democracies Die. “To call it a warning sign is an understatement.” Trump’s initial presidential campaign — during which he personally condemned a judge who ruled against him in a lawsuit over the now-defunct Trump University — changed the ground rules governing threats and explosive rhetoric, said Matthew Weil, executive director of Bipartisan Democracy Initiative. Civic Center in Washington, DC. “There are threats everywhere now, it’s become more normalized because it’s changed what was allowed in public discourse,” said Weil, who said both the right and the left have turned to the threat of the judicial branch. Nathan Hall, principal counsel of the National Center for State Courts, noted that the combination of lagging public trust, combined with access to judges’ addresses and personal information affects everyone from nationally known Supreme Court justices to anonymous other unnamed state judges. “This gets to the core issue of equal access to justice, a core fundamental principle of our ability to function as a third and independent branch of government. It’s really shaken to the core,” Hall said. “Judges are just people at the end of the day. They wear a robe, but they still go home to their families.” The latest warning sign came after last week’s search of Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida resort and political and personal headquarters. FBI agents seized 11 sets of classified information as part of an investigation into three different federal laws, including one governing the collection, transmission or loss of defense information under the Espionage Act, according to court records. Trump has accused the administration of abusing its power by targeting him, and his supporters have railed against the online probe, targeting the FBI and Justice Department. A gunman who posted threats against the FBI on Truth’s Trump social network was killed by authorities after he tried to break into the agency’s Cincinnati office. But Trump and his supporters have been waging a rhetorical war against the FBI for years following the investigation into whether his initial campaign was supported by Russia in 2016. The intense focus on a single judge like Reinhart is relatively new. Gretchen Helmke, a political scientist at the University of Rochester, said Trump’s action mirrors what demagogues have done in other countries where democracy has collapsed. “A popularly elected leader targeting a judiciary is often an early indicator of democratic erosion,” Helmke said in an email. Helmke cited Venezuela, Bolivia and Peru as places where an incoming government vowed to clean up the judiciary and then paid for it with followers. “The public never develops any real trust or confidence in the judiciary, and it is virtually cost-effective for any incoming government to use the previous government’s manipulation of the judicial system to create the court it wants,” Helmke said. “The end result is no judicial independence and no rule of law.” Hall said people can look to other countries and see what happens when public officials fear retaliation, places where “the rule of law has suffered. I guess you probably have a lot of differences of opinion about how far down that road we are already.” reach, but it raises the important question”. —— Riccardi reported from Denver.

title: “Threats By Trump Supporters To Judge Are Fueling Concerns About Democracy Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-12-15” author: “Chloe Riley”

Hundreds of federal judges face the same task every day: reviewing an affidavit filed by federal agents and approving search warrant requests. But for U.S. District Judge Bruce Rinehart, the fallout from his decision to approve a search warrant was anything but routine. He has faced a barrage of death threats since his signature cleared the way for the FBI to search former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate as part of an investigation into whether he improperly removed sensitive materials from the White House. Reinhart’s home address was published on right-wing websites, along with anti-Semitic slurs. The South Florida synagogue he attends canceled Friday night Shabbat services after the commotion. Trump has done little to cool the temperature among his supporters, denouncing the investigation as political prosecution and calling on Reinhart to recuse himself from the case because he has made political donations to Democrats in the past. However, Reinhart also contributed to the Republicans. The threats against Reinhart are part of a broader attack on law enforcement, particularly the FBI, by Trump and his allies following the investigation. But experts warn that the focus on one judge, which comes amid an increase in threats to the judiciary in general, is dangerous to the rule of law in the US and the country’s viability as a democracy. “Threats against judges carrying out their constitutional responsibilities strike at the core of our democracy,” said Associate US Judge Richard J. Sullivan, chairman of the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Security, in a statement issued recently after the investigation. “Judges should not fear retaliation for doing their job.” A phone message left at Reinhart’s chambers was not immediately returned. He will preside over the hearing Thursday at the request of media organizations, including the Associated Press, seeking to unseal the underlying affidavit filed by the Justice Department when it sought the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago. Asked to comment on the measures it has taken to protect Reinhart and his family, the US Marshals Service said in a statement: “While we do not discuss our specific security measures, we are constantly reviewing the measures in place and taking appropriate steps to provide protection as necessary ensures the integrity of the federal judicial process.” The vitriol directed at the judge, while impressive, is becoming increasingly common. In 2014, the US Marshals Service handled 768 incidents of what it described as “inappropriate communications” targeting judges and court officials. Last year, it reported more than 4,500. At some point “almost everyone recognized how inappropriate it was to threaten the life or safety of a judge because of a disagreement with the judge’s decision,” said Barbara Lynn, chief judge for the Northern District of Texas. “Now I think there are a lot of people who don’t think there’s anything wrong with it.” Lynn is one of several judicial officials pushing Congress to pass the Daniel Aderle bill, named after the 20-year-old son of District Judge Esther Salas. He was killed in 2020 when a gunman came to their home in New Jersey. His father was injured. The bill, which has the support of groups ranging from the American Bar Association to the National Association of Attorneys General, would keep more of judges’ personal information private. In June, a retired Wisconsin county judge, John Romer, was killed in his home in a targeted killing by a gunman who was also fatally wounded. Later that month, protesters gathered at the homes of conservative US Supreme Court justices after they overturned a 49-year-old ruling that women have a constitutional right to have an abortion. Police arrested a man with knives, zip ties and a gun near the home of Judge Brett Kavanaugh and said he planned to kill the conservative justice. Congress quickly approved money to beef up security at the judges’ homes and provide 24-hour protection for their families. The increased targeting of judges comes as trust in public institutions plummets and partisan rhetoric escalates. It’s part of a pattern that Steven Levitsky has seen before. “This is a classic harbinger of a democratic collapse,” said Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and co-author of How Democracies Die. “To call it a warning sign is an understatement.” Trump’s initial presidential campaign — during which he personally condemned a judge who ruled against him in a lawsuit over the now-defunct Trump University — changed the ground rules governing threats and explosive rhetoric, said Matthew Weil, executive director of Bipartisan Democracy Initiative. Civic Center in Washington, DC. “There are threats everywhere now, it’s become more normalized because it’s changed what was allowed in public discourse,” said Weil, who said both the right and the left have turned to the threat of the judicial branch. Nathan Hall, principal counsel of the National Center for State Courts, noted that the combination of lagging public trust, combined with access to judges’ addresses and personal information affects everyone from nationally known Supreme Court justices to anonymous other unnamed state judges. “This gets to the core issue of equal access to justice, a core fundamental principle of our ability to function as a third and independent branch of government. It’s really shaken to the core,” Hall said. “Judges are just people at the end of the day. They wear a robe, but they still go home to their families.” The latest warning sign came after last week’s search of Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida resort and political and personal headquarters. FBI agents seized 11 sets of classified information as part of an investigation into three different federal laws, including one governing the collection, transmission or loss of defense information under the Espionage Act, according to court records. Trump has accused the administration of abusing its power by targeting him, and his supporters have railed against the online probe, targeting the FBI and Justice Department. A gunman who posted threats against the FBI on Truth’s Trump social network was killed by authorities after he tried to break into the agency’s Cincinnati office. But Trump and his supporters have been waging a rhetorical war against the FBI for years following the investigation into whether his initial campaign was supported by Russia in 2016. The intense focus on a single judge like Reinhart is relatively new. Gretchen Helmke, a political scientist at the University of Rochester, said Trump’s action mirrors what demagogues have done in other countries where democracy has collapsed. “A popularly elected leader targeting a judiciary is often an early indicator of democratic erosion,” Helmke said in an email. Helmke cited Venezuela, Bolivia and Peru as places where an incoming government vowed to clean up the judiciary and then paid for it with followers. “The public never develops any real trust or confidence in the judiciary, and it is virtually cost-effective for any incoming government to use the previous government’s manipulation of the judicial system to create the court it wants,” Helmke said. “The end result is no judicial independence and no rule of law.” Hall said people can look to other countries and see what happens when public officials fear retaliation, places where “the rule of law has suffered. I guess you probably have a lot of differences of opinion about how far down that road we are already.” reach, but it raises the important question”. —— Riccardi reported from Denver.

title: “Threats By Trump Supporters To Judge Are Fueling Concerns About Democracy Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-12-07” author: “Janice Glass”

Hundreds of federal judges face the same task every day: reviewing an affidavit filed by federal agents and approving search warrant requests. But for U.S. District Judge Bruce Rinehart, the fallout from his decision to approve a search warrant was anything but routine. He has faced a barrage of death threats since his signature cleared the way for the FBI to search former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate as part of an investigation into whether he improperly removed sensitive materials from the White House. Reinhart’s home address was published on right-wing websites, along with anti-Semitic slurs. The South Florida synagogue he attends canceled Friday night Shabbat services after the commotion. Trump has done little to cool the temperature among his supporters, denouncing the investigation as political prosecution and calling on Reinhart to recuse himself from the case because he has made political donations to Democrats in the past. However, Reinhart also contributed to the Republicans. The threats against Reinhart are part of a broader attack on law enforcement, particularly the FBI, by Trump and his allies following the investigation. But experts warn that the focus on one judge, which comes amid an increase in threats to the judiciary in general, is dangerous to the rule of law in the US and the country’s viability as a democracy. “Threats against judges carrying out their constitutional responsibilities strike at the core of our democracy,” said Associate US Judge Richard J. Sullivan, chairman of the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Security, in a statement issued recently after the investigation. “Judges should not fear retaliation for doing their job.” A phone message left at Reinhart’s chambers was not immediately returned. He will preside over the hearing Thursday at the request of media organizations, including the Associated Press, seeking to unseal the underlying affidavit filed by the Justice Department when it sought the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago. Asked to comment on the measures it has taken to protect Reinhart and his family, the US Marshals Service said in a statement: “While we do not discuss our specific security measures, we are constantly reviewing the measures in place and taking appropriate steps to provide protection as necessary ensures the integrity of the federal judicial process.” The vitriol directed at the judge, while impressive, is becoming increasingly common. In 2014, the US Marshals Service handled 768 incidents of what it described as “inappropriate communications” targeting judges and court officials. Last year, it reported more than 4,500. At some point “almost everyone recognized how inappropriate it was to threaten the life or safety of a judge because of a disagreement with the judge’s decision,” said Barbara Lynn, chief judge for the Northern District of Texas. “Now I think there are a lot of people who don’t think there’s anything wrong with it.” Lynn is one of several judicial officials pushing Congress to pass the Daniel Aderle bill, named after the 20-year-old son of District Judge Esther Salas. He was killed in 2020 when a gunman came to their home in New Jersey. His father was injured. The bill, which has the support of groups ranging from the American Bar Association to the National Association of Attorneys General, would keep more of judges’ personal information private. In June, a retired Wisconsin county judge, John Romer, was killed in his home in a targeted killing by a gunman who was also fatally wounded. Later that month, protesters gathered at the homes of conservative US Supreme Court justices after they overturned a 49-year-old ruling that women have a constitutional right to have an abortion. Police arrested a man with knives, zip ties and a gun near the home of Judge Brett Kavanaugh and said he planned to kill the conservative justice. Congress quickly approved money to beef up security at the judges’ homes and provide 24-hour protection for their families. The increased targeting of judges comes as trust in public institutions plummets and partisan rhetoric escalates. It’s part of a pattern that Steven Levitsky has seen before. “This is a classic harbinger of a democratic collapse,” said Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and co-author of How Democracies Die. “To call it a warning sign is an understatement.” Trump’s initial presidential campaign — during which he personally condemned a judge who ruled against him in a lawsuit over the now-defunct Trump University — changed the ground rules governing threats and explosive rhetoric, said Matthew Weil, executive director of Bipartisan Democracy Initiative. Civic Center in Washington, DC. “There are threats everywhere now, it’s become more normalized because it’s changed what was allowed in public discourse,” said Weil, who said both the right and the left have turned to the threat of the judicial branch. Nathan Hall, principal counsel of the National Center for State Courts, noted that the combination of lagging public trust, combined with access to judges’ addresses and personal information affects everyone from nationally known Supreme Court justices to anonymous other unnamed state judges. “This gets to the core issue of equal access to justice, a core fundamental principle of our ability to function as a third and independent branch of government. It’s really shaken to the core,” Hall said. “Judges are just people at the end of the day. They wear a robe, but they still go home to their families.” The latest warning sign came after last week’s search of Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida resort and political and personal headquarters. FBI agents seized 11 sets of classified information as part of an investigation into three different federal laws, including one governing the collection, transmission or loss of defense information under the Espionage Act, according to court records. Trump has accused the administration of abusing its power by targeting him, and his supporters have railed against the online probe, targeting the FBI and Justice Department. A gunman who posted threats against the FBI on Truth’s Trump social network was killed by authorities after he tried to break into the agency’s Cincinnati office. But Trump and his supporters have been waging a rhetorical war against the FBI for years following the investigation into whether his initial campaign was supported by Russia in 2016. The intense focus on a single judge like Reinhart is relatively new. Gretchen Helmke, a political scientist at the University of Rochester, said Trump’s action mirrors what demagogues have done in other countries where democracy has collapsed. “A popularly elected leader targeting a judiciary is often an early indicator of democratic erosion,” Helmke said in an email. Helmke cited Venezuela, Bolivia and Peru as places where an incoming government vowed to clean up the judiciary and then paid for it with followers. “The public never develops any real trust or confidence in the judiciary, and it is virtually cost-effective for any incoming government to use the previous government’s manipulation of the judicial system to create the court it wants,” Helmke said. “The end result is no judicial independence and no rule of law.” Hall said people can look to other countries and see what happens when public officials fear retaliation, places where “the rule of law has suffered. I guess you probably have a lot of differences of opinion about how far down that road we are already.” reach, but it raises the important question”. —— Riccardi reported from Denver.

title: “Threats By Trump Supporters To Judge Are Fueling Concerns About Democracy Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-10-29” author: “Kathy Roehm”

Hundreds of federal judges face the same task every day: reviewing an affidavit filed by federal agents and approving search warrant requests. But for U.S. District Judge Bruce Rinehart, the fallout from his decision to approve a search warrant was anything but routine. He has faced a barrage of death threats since his signature cleared the way for the FBI to search former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate as part of an investigation into whether he improperly removed sensitive materials from the White House. Reinhart’s home address was published on right-wing websites, along with anti-Semitic slurs. The South Florida synagogue he attends canceled Friday night Shabbat services after the commotion. Trump has done little to cool the temperature among his supporters, denouncing the investigation as political prosecution and calling on Reinhart to recuse himself from the case because he has made political donations to Democrats in the past. However, Reinhart also contributed to the Republicans. The threats against Reinhart are part of a broader attack on law enforcement, particularly the FBI, by Trump and his allies following the investigation. But experts warn that the focus on one judge, which comes amid an increase in threats to the judiciary in general, is dangerous to the rule of law in the US and the country’s viability as a democracy. “Threats against judges carrying out their constitutional responsibilities strike at the core of our democracy,” said Associate US Judge Richard J. Sullivan, chairman of the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Security, in a statement issued recently after the investigation. “Judges should not fear retaliation for doing their job.” A phone message left at Reinhart’s chambers was not immediately returned. He will preside over the hearing Thursday at the request of media organizations, including the Associated Press, seeking to unseal the underlying affidavit filed by the Justice Department when it sought the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago. Asked to comment on the measures it has taken to protect Reinhart and his family, the US Marshals Service said in a statement: “While we do not discuss our specific security measures, we are constantly reviewing the measures in place and taking appropriate steps to provide protection as necessary ensures the integrity of the federal judicial process.” The vitriol directed at the judge, while impressive, is becoming increasingly common. In 2014, the US Marshals Service handled 768 incidents of what it described as “inappropriate communications” targeting judges and court officials. Last year, it reported more than 4,500. At some point “almost everyone recognized how inappropriate it was to threaten the life or safety of a judge because of a disagreement with the judge’s decision,” said Barbara Lynn, chief judge for the Northern District of Texas. “Now I think there are a lot of people who don’t think there’s anything wrong with it.” Lynn is one of several judicial officials pushing Congress to pass the Daniel Aderle bill, named after the 20-year-old son of District Judge Esther Salas. He was killed in 2020 when a gunman came to their home in New Jersey. His father was injured. The bill, which has the support of groups ranging from the American Bar Association to the National Association of Attorneys General, would keep more of judges’ personal information private. In June, a retired Wisconsin county judge, John Romer, was killed in his home in a targeted killing by a gunman who was also fatally wounded. Later that month, protesters gathered at the homes of conservative US Supreme Court justices after they overturned a 49-year-old ruling that women have a constitutional right to have an abortion. Police arrested a man with knives, zip ties and a gun near the home of Judge Brett Kavanaugh and said he planned to kill the conservative justice. Congress quickly approved money to beef up security at the judges’ homes and provide 24-hour protection for their families. The increased targeting of judges comes as trust in public institutions plummets and partisan rhetoric escalates. It’s part of a pattern that Steven Levitsky has seen before. “This is a classic harbinger of a democratic collapse,” said Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and co-author of How Democracies Die. “To call it a warning sign is an understatement.” Trump’s initial presidential campaign — during which he personally condemned a judge who ruled against him in a lawsuit over the now-defunct Trump University — changed the ground rules governing threats and explosive rhetoric, said Matthew Weil, executive director of Bipartisan Democracy Initiative. Civic Center in Washington, DC. “There are threats everywhere now, it’s become more normalized because it’s changed what was allowed in public discourse,” said Weil, who said both the right and the left have turned to the threat of the judicial branch. Nathan Hall, principal counsel of the National Center for State Courts, noted that the combination of lagging public trust, combined with access to judges’ addresses and personal information affects everyone from nationally known Supreme Court justices to anonymous other unnamed state judges. “This gets to the core issue of equal access to justice, a core fundamental principle of our ability to function as a third and independent branch of government. It’s really shaken to the core,” Hall said. “Judges are just people at the end of the day. They wear a robe, but they still go home to their families.” The latest warning sign came after last week’s search of Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida resort and political and personal headquarters. FBI agents seized 11 sets of classified information as part of an investigation into three different federal laws, including one governing the collection, transmission or loss of defense information under the Espionage Act, according to court records. Trump has accused the administration of abusing its power by targeting him, and his supporters have railed against the online probe, targeting the FBI and Justice Department. A gunman who posted threats against the FBI on Truth’s Trump social network was killed by authorities after he tried to break into the agency’s Cincinnati office. But Trump and his supporters have been waging a rhetorical war against the FBI for years following the investigation into whether his initial campaign was supported by Russia in 2016. The intense focus on a single judge like Reinhart is relatively new. Gretchen Helmke, a political scientist at the University of Rochester, said Trump’s action mirrors what demagogues have done in other countries where democracy has collapsed. “A popularly elected leader targeting a judiciary is often an early indicator of democratic erosion,” Helmke said in an email. Helmke cited Venezuela, Bolivia and Peru as places where an incoming government vowed to clean up the judiciary and then paid for it with followers. “The public never develops any real trust or confidence in the judiciary, and it is virtually cost-effective for any incoming government to use the previous government’s manipulation of the judicial system to create the court it wants,” Helmke said. “The end result is no judicial independence and no rule of law.” Hall said people can look to other countries and see what happens when public officials fear retaliation, places where “the rule of law has suffered. I guess you probably have a lot of differences of opinion about how far down that road we are already.” reach, but it raises the important question”. —— Riccardi reported from Denver.

title: “Threats By Trump Supporters To Judge Are Fueling Concerns About Democracy Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-10-31” author: “Ray Wininger”

Hundreds of federal judges face the same task every day: reviewing an affidavit filed by federal agents and approving search warrant requests. But for U.S. District Judge Bruce Rinehart, the fallout from his decision to approve a search warrant was anything but routine. He has faced a barrage of death threats since his signature cleared the way for the FBI to search former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate as part of an investigation into whether he improperly removed sensitive materials from the White House. Reinhart’s home address was published on right-wing websites, along with anti-Semitic slurs. The South Florida synagogue he attends canceled Friday night Shabbat services after the commotion. Trump has done little to cool the temperature among his supporters, denouncing the investigation as political prosecution and calling on Reinhart to recuse himself from the case because he has made political donations to Democrats in the past. However, Reinhart also contributed to the Republicans. The threats against Reinhart are part of a broader attack on law enforcement, particularly the FBI, by Trump and his allies following the investigation. But experts warn that the focus on one judge, which comes amid an increase in threats to the judiciary in general, is dangerous to the rule of law in the US and the country’s viability as a democracy. “Threats against judges carrying out their constitutional responsibilities strike at the core of our democracy,” said Associate US Judge Richard J. Sullivan, chairman of the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Security, in a statement issued recently after the investigation. “Judges should not fear retaliation for doing their job.” A phone message left at Reinhart’s chambers was not immediately returned. He will preside over the hearing Thursday at the request of media organizations, including the Associated Press, seeking to unseal the underlying affidavit filed by the Justice Department when it sought the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago. Asked to comment on the measures it has taken to protect Reinhart and his family, the US Marshals Service said in a statement: “While we do not discuss our specific security measures, we are constantly reviewing the measures in place and taking appropriate steps to provide protection as necessary ensures the integrity of the federal judicial process.” The vitriol directed at the judge, while impressive, is becoming increasingly common. In 2014, the US Marshals Service handled 768 incidents of what it described as “inappropriate communications” targeting judges and court officials. Last year, it reported more than 4,500. At some point “almost everyone recognized how inappropriate it was to threaten the life or safety of a judge because of a disagreement with the judge’s decision,” said Barbara Lynn, chief judge for the Northern District of Texas. “Now I think there are a lot of people who don’t think there’s anything wrong with it.” Lynn is one of several judicial officials pushing Congress to pass the Daniel Aderle bill, named after the 20-year-old son of District Judge Esther Salas. He was killed in 2020 when a gunman came to their home in New Jersey. His father was injured. The bill, which has the support of groups ranging from the American Bar Association to the National Association of Attorneys General, would keep more of judges’ personal information private. In June, a retired Wisconsin county judge, John Romer, was killed in his home in a targeted killing by a gunman who was also fatally wounded. Later that month, protesters gathered at the homes of conservative US Supreme Court justices after they overturned a 49-year-old ruling that women have a constitutional right to have an abortion. Police arrested a man with knives, zip ties and a gun near the home of Judge Brett Kavanaugh and said he planned to kill the conservative justice. Congress quickly approved money to beef up security at the judges’ homes and provide 24-hour protection for their families. The increased targeting of judges comes as trust in public institutions plummets and partisan rhetoric escalates. It’s part of a pattern that Steven Levitsky has seen before. “This is a classic harbinger of a democratic collapse,” said Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and co-author of How Democracies Die. “To call it a warning sign is an understatement.” Trump’s initial presidential campaign — during which he personally condemned a judge who ruled against him in a lawsuit over the now-defunct Trump University — changed the ground rules governing threats and explosive rhetoric, said Matthew Weil, executive director of Bipartisan Democracy Initiative. Civic Center in Washington, DC. “There are threats everywhere now, it’s become more normalized because it’s changed what was allowed in public discourse,” said Weil, who said both the right and the left have turned to the threat of the judicial branch. Nathan Hall, principal counsel of the National Center for State Courts, noted that the combination of lagging public trust, combined with access to judges’ addresses and personal information affects everyone from nationally known Supreme Court justices to anonymous other unnamed state judges. “This gets to the core issue of equal access to justice, a core fundamental principle of our ability to function as a third and independent branch of government. It’s really shaken to the core,” Hall said. “Judges are just people at the end of the day. They wear a robe, but they still go home to their families.” The latest warning sign came after last week’s search of Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida resort and political and personal headquarters. FBI agents seized 11 sets of classified information as part of an investigation into three different federal laws, including one governing the collection, transmission or loss of defense information under the Espionage Act, according to court records. Trump has accused the administration of abusing its power by targeting him, and his supporters have railed against the online probe, targeting the FBI and Justice Department. A gunman who posted threats against the FBI on Truth’s Trump social network was killed by authorities after he tried to break into the agency’s Cincinnati office. But Trump and his supporters have been waging a rhetorical war against the FBI for years following the investigation into whether his initial campaign was supported by Russia in 2016. The intense focus on a single judge like Reinhart is relatively new. Gretchen Helmke, a political scientist at the University of Rochester, said Trump’s action mirrors what demagogues have done in other countries where democracy has collapsed. “A popularly elected leader targeting a judiciary is often an early indicator of democratic erosion,” Helmke said in an email. Helmke cited Venezuela, Bolivia and Peru as places where an incoming government vowed to clean up the judiciary and then paid for it with followers. “The public never develops any real trust or confidence in the judiciary, and it is virtually cost-effective for any incoming government to use the previous government’s manipulation of the judicial system to create the court it wants,” Helmke said. “The end result is no judicial independence and no rule of law.” Hall said people can look to other countries and see what happens when public officials fear retaliation, places where “the rule of law has suffered. I guess you probably have a lot of differences of opinion about how far down that road we are already.” reach, but it raises the important question”. —— Riccardi reported from Denver.