Talking Points: Protecting the Security of Federal Judges

The Issue:

• The 117^th Congress needs to pass bipartisan legislation to protect our federal judges from physical harm and preserve their ability to issue decisions based on the facts of the case without fear of reprisal or physical harm.
• The most likely path to enactment is for Congress to pass the legislation as part of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2023 (NDAA). It is included in the Senate version of the NDAA, which now must be passed by the entire Senate and sent back to the House for final passage.   
• The legislation (S. 2340 and H.R. 4436), known as the DANIEL ANDERL JUDICIAL SECURITY AND PRIVACY ACT, was named after the son of Federal District Court Judge Esther Salas who was murdered in their family home by a disgruntled assailant who easily tracked down the judge’s home address on the internet. Congress needs to act now to reduce the likelihood of this happening again.
• The ready availability of judges’ personal information on the Internet and the ease with which such information can be shared through social media puts our judges at risk every time they issue a decision that may be controversial or unpopular.
• This legislation would enhance judicial security by restricting the disclosure and publication of judges’ personally identifiable information, authorizing injunctive relief for violations, and beefing up the ability of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO) and the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) to assess, deter, and protect judges from credible threats of harm to themselves and their family.

The Message:

Our job is to make sure that neither chamber removes the judicial security provisions from the NDAA before final passage this year.

The message is simple:  

1. Enactment of bipartisan judicial security legislation is urgently needed to preserve the ability of our federal judges to impartially decide matters that come before them without feal of reprisal or physical harm to themselves and their families.  
2. Right now, the ready availability of personally identifiable information on the internet and the ease with which such information can be shared through social media puts our judges at risk every time they issue a decision that may be controversial or unpopular.
3. Legislation to permit removal of such information was recently included in the Senate version of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2023 (NDAA). Please tell your Members of Congress to make sure that it remains in the final version of the NDAA that is passed by the Senate and House. 

Issues that May Arise:

• Judges are not the only ones who need additional security; Members of Congress also are at risk.
  
  We do not disagree with that, but the ABA is especially concerned about threats to judges because they not only pose a real danger to judges and family members, but they also have a chilling effect on the ability of our judges to render decisions based on the facts without fear of reprisal or harm. A truly independent judiciary protects our system of government. We therefore believe that passage of this legislation should not be held hostage to negotiations over enhancing security for other federal workers.
• Opponents argue that this bill raises 1st Amendment concerns and stifles transparency.
  
  Prior to reintroduction this year, bill language was carefully revised to respond to raised concerns. The legislation now clearly recognizes and protects the press’s right to report on judicial malfeasance or other newsworthy information regarding federal judges and immediate family members or to investigate and inform on newsworthy matters. In addition, it is important to note that the legislation does not affect the requirement for judges to file public financial disclosure forms that help identify conflicts of interest.

Questions about the bill?
Contact: Denise Cardman, Deputy Director
Governmental Affairs Office
[email protected]
Mobile: 202-203-0594