Under the cover of anonymity, 12 federal judges voiced their frustrations with the U.S. Supreme Court and its handling of the second Trump administration thus far.
The judges, apparently appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents, told NBC News that their primary concern is the growing lack of trust in the judiciary nationwide. They say that part of the blame lies with the U.S. Supreme Court, which has overturned lower court rulings and sided with the Trump administration.
“It is inexcusable,” one judge said of the Supreme Court justices to the news outlet. “They don’t have our backs.”
When a ruling is handed down that the Trump administration does not find favorable, the judges said their safety is put at risk. As of June 2025, there were more than 400 investigations regarding threats against judges, compared to 457 in fiscal year 2023, per NBC News.
One judge, who said the Supreme Court justices are “behaving inexcusably,” also said that they are fearful to open the front door when someone knocks and have received violent threats. If the issues are not addressed, “somebody is going to die,” the judge claimed.
As of Sept. 2, out of the 23 emergency applications requested by the Trump administration, the Supreme Court has issued 20 emergency orders in response, according to Ballotpedia. One emergency application is still pending, and two have been withdrawn.
The judges’ other primary concern with the higher court is that in their emergency rulings, they are not providing federal judges with enough explanation to assist them in making decisions.
“Judges in the trenches need, and deserve, well-reasoned, bright-line guidance,” a judge said. “Too often today, sweeping rulings arrive with breathtaking speed but minimal explanation, stripped of the rigor that full briefing and argument provide.”
Utah lawmaker defends Supreme Court
Utah Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, said it’s a fair criticism, but defended the Supreme Court.
“When there’s an emergency ruling, I do expect a shorter notation that says yes or no, and then a full explanation can come out later. I understand that for federal judges, that leaves them in a query, and they’re guessing,” Weiler told the Deseret News. Still, he added that it’s understandable when the Supreme Court is in recess from around June or July to October and they’re not fully staffed.
Another judge told NBC News that the Supreme Court’s rulings effectively affirm comments such as those by White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, who described the federal courts as participating in a “judicial coup.”
But Weiler doesn’t see it that way.
“I think since Trump retook office, you have a lot of political activists who are running around to district courts like Maryland that traditionally have Democratic president-appointed judges and they have a propensity to tell Trump that he’s wrong and that he can’t use his presidential powers,” he said.
“And so I think, I think the Supreme Court is not driving this agenda. I think they’re reacting to other people’s agendas.”
Activists, Weiler said, are trying to get their cases to judges “that they think will be inclined to tell Trump he can’t exercise the powers that the Constitution has given to all presidents,” but also, “there are certain federal judges who are more inclined, I think, to issue a ruling against Trump that they wouldn’t have done against Biden or Obama or Bush.”
He added, “So, I don’t blame the Supreme Court here. I think they’re playing Whack-a-Mole. I think that the problem is, A) the activist plaintiffs, and, B) some of the judges who are more than willing to play along when an activist plaintiff asks for an injunction.”