by
SAUL
LOEB/AFP
via
Getty
Images)
The
threat
environment
for
federal
judges
is
pretty
awful
right
about
now.
For
federal
judges
—
ones
appointed
by Democrats
and
Republicans alike
—
who
have
presented
speed
bumps
to
Donald
Trump‘s
authoritarian
takeover,
the
GOP
responded
with name-calling and
articles
of impeachment.
And
House
Speaker
Mike
Johnson
just
poured
gasoline
on
the
fire.
Despite
previously
putting
the
pause
on
impeachment
talk
around
judges
who
rule
against
the
Trump
administration,
last
week
Johnson
changed
his
tune.
When
asked
about
impeachment
efforts
against
judges,
he
didn’t
even
pretend
this
was
a
bad
idea
in
theory
but
impractical
in
reality.
He
said,
plainly,
“I’m
for
it.”
To
be
sure,
Johnson
offered
a
little
in
the
way
of
throat-clearing.
Impeachment
would
be
“an
extreme
measure,”
he
acknowledged,
adding
“we’ll
see
where
it
goes.”
Seems
like
that
whole
we-don’t-have-67-votes
issue
is
rearing
its
head.
But
then
he
doubled
down,
suggesting
that
some
judges
have
strayed
“so
far
outside
the
bounds
of
where
they’re
supposed
to
operate”
that
Congress
should
“lay
down
the
law”
and
“make
an
example
of
some
of
the
egregious
abuses.”
That
rhetoric
might
play
well
on
right-wing
cable
news,
but
it’s
also
profoundly
dangerous.
There’s
a
sharp
increase
in
threats
against
federal
judges
— up
327% in
the
Trump
II
era.
Bullying
judges has
become
a
mainstream
tactic
that
Johnson
is
playing
into,
floating
impeachment
casually
and
often
without
any
plausible
allegation
of
impeachable
conduct.
That
casualness
is
precisely
the
problem.
When
leaders
normalize
the
idea
that
judges
should
fear
reprisal
for
doing
their
jobs,
the
most
unhinged
actors
hear
permission,
not
caution.
And
that
is
what’s
happening.
The
relevant
backdrop
against
which
the
Speaker
of
the
House
is
publicly
endorsing
impeachment
as
a
response
to
unfavorable
rulings
is
a
spike
in
death
threats,
a
record
numbers
of
investigations
by
the
U.S.
Marshals,
increased
security,
and
judges
with
a
genuine
fear
for
themselves
and
their
families.
Impeachment
is
not
a
tool
for
correcting
legal
error.
It
is
not
a
substitute
for
appellate
review.
But
we
have
the
Speaker
of
the
House
publicly
musing
about
“making
an
example”
of
judges.
Threatening
impeachment
because
you
don’t
like
the
outcome
is
intimidation,
and
it’s
a
warped
view
of
accountability
to
suggest
otherwise.
This
is
the
modern
GOP
game
plan.
Sustained
pressure.
Delegitimization.
The
steady
drumbeat
of
consequences
for
disobedience.
And
powerful
politicians
arguing
that
judges
who
rule
the
“wrong”
way
deserve
what’s
coming.
Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of
The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter
@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon
@[email protected].