CHICAGO (WLS) — Officials from the federal judiciary are voicing concerns about the escalating threats directed at district judges, particularly following several prominent cases and decisions by the Northern District Court of Illinois.

In a seldom-given interview, Chief U.S. District Judge Virginia Kendall expressed her apprehensions about what she sees as a significant threat to the core of democratic institutions. She revealed to the ABC7 Chicago I-Team that threats targeting federal judges have been consistently rising each year.

ABC7 Chicago is now streaming 24/7. Click here to watch

“I’ve observed a notable increase in threats against my colleagues on the bench,” Judge Kendall explained to the I-Team. “The foundation of our democracy relies on the separation of its three branches, and it is crucial for each to operate independently. Judges must remain unaffected by public sentiment, financial influence, or personal reputation. Their responsibility is to uphold the law impartially.”

Data from the U.S. Marshals Service highlights a 40% surge in threats against judges across the country over the past four years.

In Chicago, the federal judges serving the Northern District of Illinois are experiencing a pronounced rise in threats, particularly related to recent immigration enforcement cases.

According to sources, at least five federal judges involved in high-profile cases have faced threats. Among them are District Judge April Perry, handling a case concerning the National Guard’s Illinois deployment; District Judge Sara Ellis, overseeing a case on federal immigration agents’ use of force; District Judge LaShonda Hunt, who issued a ruling on fencing around the Broadview U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) processing facility; District Judge Jeffrey Cummings, involved in litigation over a warrantless arrest consent decree; and Magistrate Judge Laura McNally, managing litigation about conditions inside the Broadview ICE facility.

When asked about these threats, Kendall told the I-Team, “No question. I don’t think it matters which side they would have ruled. That’s the climate that we’re in.”

“If you rule for or against a particular issue, it seems to be fair game for this kind of reactive behavior on the part of the public. And mind you, it’s not all of the public. We have tremendous support. … But it doesn’t matter when it’s pitted up against this group of individuals that choose to use this language, choose to use these attacks to spread derogatory information about individual human beings,” Kendall said.

The Federal Bar Association’s Chicago chapter recently condemned the rise in threats to judges in the Northern District of Illinois and across the country.

“Expressions of public sentiment-whether criticism or praise-are not threats to judicial independence,” the FBA Chicago chapter statement reads. “Recent threats of violence directed at Chicago federal judges for simply doing their job, however, are unacceptable and have no place in our discourse.”

In response to rulings in several local immigration-related cases, officials with the Trump administration have called out “activist judges” as responsible for rulings it deems not in the administration’s favor.

Judge Kendall said the entire bench rules impartially.

“Each of the judges on this bench, they don’t go out to be political,” Judge Kendall said. “They go out saying, ‘I’ve got my law degree, I’ve got my oath from the President. It’s now time for me to listen to evidence, listen to facts, apply the law and come to a fair and impartial decision.’”

But with the rise of social media, and access to personal information online, Judge Kendall says intimidation has increased, especially in recent months.

Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Illinois Thomas Bruton said he has seen this first-hand.

“We have seen threats significantly increase,” Bruton said. “We’ve seen threats increase both online, through email communication, through phone communication, and it’s concerning.”

Bruton added, “It’s a difficult job when you look at the statistics and the number of judges that have been threatened, you look at the number of staff that have received inappropriate communications. But it’s our job to keep everyone safe.”

Geoffrey Deas is the assistant director of judicial security for the U.S. Marshals Service. Deas told the I-Team he is particularly concerned with “silent hunters,” or people who may not have made any active threat but are triggered to action by violent rhetoric.

Deas explained the U.S. Marshals Service evaluates any communications sent to district judges, and if the communication goes beyond “First Amendment Protected Speech,” the U.S. Marshals, along with the Federal Bureau of Investigations, has statutory power to investigate further.

In 2025, Deas said 364 different judges out of approximately 2,500 active judges nationwide were named as threatened on a protective investigation.

Deas said he expects to see an uptick in threats to judges locally because of the intensity surrounding recent immigration-related rulings.

Judge Kendall worries the threats could have long-term consequences.

“It’s really critical that you can seek redress in the federal court,” Judge Kendall said. “The public really needs to understand how serious it is for the independence of the judiciary because judges just need to be able to do their job. … If they’re disagreed with, then there’s a higher court. But in order to do that, well, we have to be able to just honestly do our jobs without that nervousness of threats.”