In a rare and stark public warning, Chief Justice John Roberts cautioned that increasingly incendiary political rhetoric—especially directed at the judiciary—is putting judges’ lives at risk. Without naming names, Roberts made it clear that figures like Donald Trump and Chuck Schumer are on his mind.
Speaking at a judicial conference in Charlotte, North Carolina on June 28, Roberts said, “It becomes wrapped up in the political dispute that a judge who’s doing his or her job is part of the problem.” He went on to warn, “The danger, of course, is somebody might pick up on that… and we have had serious threats of violence and murder of judges just for doing their work.”
The comments came just one day after the Supreme Court delivered a significant victory to Trump, limiting the use of nationwide injunctions that had blocked his policies in lower courts. The decision is likely to further embolden Trump’s attacks on judges he deems obstructive.
Roberts has spoken out before. In 2018, he famously rebuked Trump’s labeling of an immigration judge as an “Obama judge.” In 2020, he denounced Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s threat that Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch would “pay the price” for their abortion-related rulings.
But this time, the stakes feel higher.
The backdrop is chilling: in 2022, a man was arrested with weapons outside Brett Kavanaugh’s home, allegedly planning to assassinate the justice. And in recent months, threats against federal judges have surged. According to the U.S. Marshals Service, such threats are up 200% since 2020.
Roberts’ warning isn’t just about violent outbursts. It’s about the corrosion of public trust and the independence of the judiciary—pillars of American democracy that now tremble under partisan fire.
His remarks land at a politically combustible time. The 2025 election cycle is intensifying, and Trump has made demonizing judges central to his messaging—particularly those who’ve ruled against his immigration policies or criminal cases.
The Chief Justice’s statement, broadcast live on C-SPAN, didn’t stop at finger-wagging. It was a plea for restraint and responsibility. “Political people on both sides of the aisle need to keep that in mind,” he urged.
Yet Roberts also faces criticism for not calling out specific threats more directly, especially as the Supreme Court’s own legitimacy suffers in the public eye. Approval ratings for the Court are at historic lows, with many Americans seeing it as partisan.
Still, his message was crystal clear: the line between rhetoric and real-world violence is thinner than ever—and those in power must tread carefully.
In this dangerous moment, Roberts has drawn a judicial red line. The question now is—will anyone in Washington listen?