NextFin news, WASHINGTON, D.C. — On Thursday, a group of twelve federal judges from across the United States, speaking anonymously, publicly criticized the U.S. Supreme Court for its handling of cases involving former President Donald Trump. The judges expressed frustration that the Supreme Court, particularly under Chief Justice John Roberts, has increasingly overturned lower court rulings related to the Trump administration with little or no explanation.
The judges, appointed by presidents from both parties including Trump himself, said this pattern of terse emergency rulings—often issued through the court's so-called "shadow docket"—has surged in recent years. They argued that the lack of detailed reasoning leaves lower court judges without clear guidance on how to proceed and undermines the judiciary's credibility at a time when violent threats against judges are rising.
According to the judges, the Supreme Court's brief orders in these high-profile cases effectively validate harsh criticisms from Trump and his allies, who accuse judges ruling against the former president of bias. One judge described the Supreme Court's conduct as "inexcusable," saying, "They don’t have our backs." Another judge warned that if the situation is not addressed, it could lead to violence against members of the judiciary.
The judges highlighted that the number of emergency rulings has dramatically increased, with the Trump administration filing 23 emergency applications to the Supreme Court since January, of which 17 were granted. These rulings have overturned lower court decisions blocking Trump policies on immigration, birthright citizenship, and federal employment, among others.
Federal judges also noted that the Supreme Court's failure to provide thorough explanations for these decisions fuels claims by White House senior adviser Stephen Miller that the judiciary is attempting a "judicial coup" against the presidency. One judge said, "It’s almost like the Supreme Court is saying it is a ‘judicial coup.’"
While some judges acknowledged that certain lower court rulings against Trump policies may have been excessive, they maintained that the Supreme Court has an obligation to explain its decisions clearly to maintain public trust and judicial integrity.
The judges' concerns come amid a rise in threats against federal judges, with the U.S. Marshals Service reporting over 400 threat investigations this year alone. Judges involved in high-profile cases have faced bomb threats, swatting incidents, and other harassment, increasing the urgency for the Supreme Court to defend the judiciary's role and safety.
The Supreme Court has not publicly responded to these criticisms. The judges spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of their comments and the risk of retaliation.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.
