Amid a political firestorm stoked by Donald Trump and his allies, the U.S. federal judiciary has quietly formed a new defensive front—a task force dedicated to safeguarding the independence and security of America’s judges.
In a confidential memo circulated to judges across the country, the judiciary announced the creation of the Judicial Security and Independence Task Force. The move comes as some Republican lawmakers push to defund courts, strip judges of power, or even impeach those issuing rulings against Trump’s interests.
The memo, authored by Judge Robert Conrad, director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, avoided naming Trump directly. But the timing and tone suggest a judiciary increasingly alarmed by political threats seeping into courtrooms. According to Conrad, the task force’s mission is to “identify, analyze, and propose responses to ensure the continued security and independence of courts and judges.”
At the helm is U.S. District Judge James Bredar of Baltimore, an Obama-era appointee currently presiding over one of more than 130 lawsuits challenging Trump administration actions. In a recent case brought by 19 Democrat-led states and D.C., Bredar ordered the reinstatement of 25,000 federal workers purged during Trump’s civil service shakeup.
That ruling, and others like it, have made Bredar and his peers the target of impeachment calls. Trump has publicly demanded the ouster of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who blocked his use of emergency powers to deport Venezuelan migrants. The backlash drew an uncommon public statement from Chief Justice John Roberts, who pushed back: “Impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.”
The new task force includes figures from both ends of the political spectrum—like U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Sullivan, head of the judiciary’s security committee, and Judge John Bates of Washington, a George W. Bush appointee also facing blowback for rulings against Trump.
House Speaker Mike Johnson added fuel to the fire this week, warning that Congress could cut judicial funding or even abolish entire district courts. A GOP-backed bill—already cleared by the House Judiciary Committee—seeks to strip federal judges of the authority to issue nationwide injunctions, a tool frequently used to block sweeping executive orders.
While some see these developments as political theater, others view them as cracks forming in the foundations of judicial independence.
The newly launched task force now faces the difficult job of patching those cracks—before pressure from outside the courthouse spills into the decisions made within.
