State Courts Plead for More Security Funding as Threats Rise

Self-defense courses. Internet anonymity services. Sheriff escorts to and from their jobs.

This is the life of a judge in 2025, according to a panel of state supreme court justices from across the country that assembled in Madison, Wis., to discuss challenges facing courts, including how partisan rhetoric—and escalating battles with state legislatures—have imperiled the lives of state judges.

New Mexico Supreme Court Justice C. Shannon Bacon said that legislators wouldn’t budge on judicial security, despite armed protesters marching in front of the state high court—where the only security was a security guard at the front desk.

Then an explosive devicewas discovered near a trial court “and suddenly there was money for everything,” Bacon told a crowd of jurists and lawyers at a University of Wisconsin Law School State Democracy Research Initiative event.

While attacks on federal judges get the most headlines, state jurists from Utah to Virginia said that their courts face more threats with less funding—and the violence is only increasing.

During a time when the New Mexico justices were handling firearm and abortion rights cases, the court had to escort the bench to and from their homes every day for a month due to the threats on justices and their families.

“We have normalized violence as a way to express displeasure nationally,” said Bacon. “Federal judges have the marshals and some travel with security everywhere they go. I’m alone in steerage in the back of Southwest like everyone else.”

Driveways Become Dangers

More than 95% of litigation takes place in state courts, and this means most disgruntled litigants target state judges, said Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Loretta Rush.

There’s no end to the violence, said Rush, who herself was assaulted by a litigant. Indiana has hired security consultants to train judges about security threats.

“There’s a lot of attacks on driveways,” she said. “Threats are up. I have a lot of threats.”

While some states, like New Jersey, have leaned into legislation seeking to prevent publication of judges’ personal information, others aren’t waiting for legislatures to act.

Virginia hired a private company to remove judges’ addresses and private information from the Internet. Combined with a push to keep judges off social media, “If someone is looking for my home address its not easy to find,” said Virginia Supreme Court Senior Justice William C. Mims.

The state now charges bar members to run a wellness program in part to deal with the trauma of judges, Mims said.

Hostile Legislatures

State legislatures have been resistant to paying for increased judicial security, the panelists said, a fight sometimes sparked by legislators angry with the courts’ decisions.

Courts are finding it necessary to hire lobbyists to fend off harmful legislation and squeeze more cash out of budget bills, Rush said. Several justices talked about how they raided state and federal storage facilities to find furniture for their offices because budgets wouldn’t provide it. In New Mexico, budgets got so tight that courts would unscrew all but necessary light bulbs, and judges had to bring in their own toilet paper, Bacon said.

Utah is seeing escalating fights with lawmakers frustrated by the state high court’s redistricting decisions, state Supreme Court Justice Paige Petersen said. Recent legislation has tried to increase thresholds for judicial retention votes and create a legislative rating system that would put lawmakers’ approval or disapproval of jurists on the ballot.

“Our heartache comes from how do we protect this institution and keep our independence because we have to check another branch that has more power than we do,” she said.