Federal judges are being targeted with pizza doxxing; no one has been held to account

A Domino’s pizza shows up at a federal judge’s door in the middle of the night. No one in the house ordered it. The message: Someone knows where you live and where your children sleep.

A new study from the Berkeley Judicial Institute and the Rule of Law Lab at NYU School of Law reports nearly 200 anonymous pizza deliveries to federal judges since 2025, targeting judges appointed by presidents of both parties.

At least 20 such deliveries were made in the name of Daniel Anderl — the son of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas. He was killed in 2020 by a disgruntled lawyer who had appeared before Judge Salas. Salas, one of 34 sitting judges with whom we spoke, called the deliveries “a veiled threat, warning the judge that they could end up like me or my son.”

Federal criminal law prohibits such threats , but Salas noted that the people responsible “remain at large.” We found no public record of arrests or prosecutions.

In most cases, the targeted judge had recently ruled against the Trump administration. U.S. District Judge John McConnell was the first to tell Salas he had received a pizza in her son’s name after such a ruling. In March 2025, Justice Amy Coney Barrett received one after joining an opinion the administration opposed; family members in South Carolina were targeted around the same time.

Other judges have been targeted simply for speaking out about attacks on colleagues. U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik and his two adult children, living in different cities, each had pizzas delivered in Daniel Anderl’s name after his criticism of judicial attacks aired on television. Another judge told us that after he spoke on a panel about attacks on the judiciary, he and his panelists — scattered across several states — received pizzas that same evening.

Targeted judges told us that the pizza deliveries are being coordinated across the country, and that the Marshals Service, the agency charged with protecting them, is not equipped to investigate such threats. “With all the pizza deliveries that are occurring all over the country,” remarked a judge, “how is it that we don’t have an answer to date about who is behind these threats?”

Pizza deliveries are just one of many threats facing little accountability. And one has to wonder why. These are orders placed through commercial outlets, with records and delivery logs, used to threaten judges across multiple states. Yet after 200 incidents, no one has been identified.

Several judges, appointed by presidents of both political parties, told us they knew of no arrests or prosecutions relating to the threats they’d faced, even though such threats are clearly prohibited by federal criminal law. Among them was Judge McConnell, who also received at least six credible death threats and whose daughter had her personal information posted online.

U.S. District Judge John Coughenour was “swatted.” Police appeared at his home, guns drawn, after a false report was made that he had just murdered his wife. That gap raises a broader question: Are threats against federal judges being sufficiently investigated and, where appropriate, prosecuted?

The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, the administrative arm of the federal judiciary, has informed Congress that “[s]ecurity incidents of significant concern” increased for judges by 57 percent in fiscal 2025 and are “on pace to rise again” this year. But judges say the Marshals Service, while dedicated, is underfunded and understaffed. The chair of the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Judicial Security, Judge Richard Sullivan, told us it has fewer than 3,900 deputies responsible for protecting roughly 2,500 to 2,700 federal judges nationwide. Its own director has asked Congress for a thousand more deputies. Congress has not funded them.

Federal judges have stayed true to their oath to the Constitution. “We’re all still doing our jobs, without fear or favor,” one judge said. But the personal toll is real and underreported. One judge described spending 45 minutes weighing whether to abandon a ruling he knew was legally sound, just to protect his family. He didn’t, but he said he was “traumatized.” A judge with nearly two decades on the bench, previously unafraid, now instinctively wonders, “Is this the day I’m going to get shot at? … I do feel like we are sitting ducks.”

Judges now avoid answering their doors for unexpected deliveries and have removed office numbers from court websites — making them harder to reach, even for unrepresented litigants. Several worry it will drive judges to leave and deter talented lawyers from joining the bench.

The persistence of coordinated attacks on the judiciary without visible consequence for perpetrators poses a grave threat to our constitutional order. Congress should fund the Marshals Service sufficiently to protect the judges who depend on it, and the Department of Justice should prioritize investigating threats against federal judges. These threats deserve real investigation and prosecution where warranted.

Jeremy Fogel is a retired U.S. District Court Judge and the executive director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute. Amrit Singh is professor of practice and faculty director of the Rule of Law Lab at New York University School of Law.