Attacks on judicial independence
Judicial independence requires that judges decide cases on the law and the facts, free from threat or coercion from political actors. Attacks on independence include public threats of impeachment for unwelcome rulings, organized campaigns to delegitimize specific judges or panels, statutory proposals to strip jurisdiction from courts that have ruled against the administration, court-packing schemes intended to produce predetermined outcomes, and refusal to enforce judgments. Routine criticism of opinions is ordinary; attacks are what happens when the goal is to alter how judges decide future cases through pressure or institutional restructuring.
Documented entries (7)
2026
DOJ told D.C. Circuit no court has authority to block Trump's $400m White House ballroom
At a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals hearing on June 5, 2026, a Justice Department lawyer argued that no court — not the panel, not the Supreme Court — has the authority to halt or order the demolition of President Trump's $400m White House ballroom, contending that only Congress could intervene. Pressed by Judge Patricia Millett on whether any court could stop the construction, the government answered no, even when asked whether courts could stop the executive from bulldozing the Statue of Liberty. The administration is appealing District Judge Richard Leon's earlier ruling that Trump lacked legal authority for the project.
Trump demands a federal judge be criminally charged and impeached over a ruling against him
On May 30, 2026, President Donald Trump published a 700-word Truth Social post demanding that U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper "be brought up on charges" and impeached over Cooper's ruling that the Kennedy Center board lacked authority to rename the institution after Trump. Trump asserted the judge had "a total Conflict of Interest," citing the political affiliations of Cooper's wife, attorney Amy Jeffress, rather than any finding of judicial misconduct. The demand to prosecute and remove a sitting judge specifically for how he ruled is a direct pressure campaign against judicial independence.
DOJ swore in active-duty military JAG officers as temporary immigration judges
On May 20, 2026, the Justice Department's Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) held an investiture at the DOJ Great Hall swearing in 77 permanent and 5 temporary immigration judges — the largest single class in the agency's history. The 5 temporary judges are active-duty military Judge Advocate General (JAG) attorneys, the first cohort detailed under an August 2025 Pentagon authorization to assign up to 600 military lawyers to the immigration courts. The buildout follows the removal of more than 100 sitting immigration judges and the hiring of enforcement-aligned replacements, and is explicitly aimed at accelerating deportation cases.
DOJ fires six immigration judges, including two who blocked deportations of Öztürk and Mahdawi
The Justice Department on April 10, 2026 fired six immigration judges, among them Boston judge Roopal Patel, who ruled in January that the government had no grounds to deport Tufts doctoral student Rümeysa Öztürk, and Chelmsford, Massachusetts judge Nina Froes, who in February dismissed deportation proceedings against Columbia activist Mohsen Mahdawi. Both judges were dismissed by email mid-hearing near the end of their probationary periods, in a purge in which the National Association of Immigration Judges says at least 113 of roughly 750 immigration judges have been fired since January 2025.
White House fires court-appointed U.S. Attorney Donald Kinsella hours after judges seated him
After a federal court found the administration's prior U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York was serving unlawfully, the district's judges invoked 28 U.S.C. § 546 to appoint veteran prosecutor Donald T. Kinsella, who was sworn in on February 11, 2026. Within about five hours, the White House emailed Kinsella that the president had removed him, and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche posted that "judges don't pick U.S. Attorneys, @POTUS does," telling Kinsella, "You are fired."
2025
AG Bondi filed judicial misconduct complaint against Chief Judge Boasberg, seeking removal from deportation cases
Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the Department of Justice to file a formal judicial misconduct complaint against Chief Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on July 29, 2025, alleging he made "improper" remarks at a closed judicial conference where he reportedly expressed concern the Trump administration would defy court orders and trigger a "constitutional crisis." The complaint, filed with D.C. Circuit Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan, explicitly requested Boasberg's reassignment from deportation cases and a special-committee investigation. Boasberg had presided over multiple rulings blocking Trump administration deportation flights prior to the complaint.
Defense Secretary Hegseth told Senate he would follow appellate court but defy district court order blocking Los Angeles military deployment
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on June 18, 2025, stating he would respect the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling allowing the Los Angeles National Guard deployment to continue, but would not comply with U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer's temporary restraining order blocking it. Hegseth also asserted that deployed troops could "temporarily detain" protesters and hand them to ICE for immigration processing. Senator Elizabeth Warren extracted a commitment from Hegseth to follow Supreme Court orders—a response that itself implied he would not necessarily obey lower courts.