A surge in high-profile lawsuits against President Donald Trump has put a national spotlight on Maryland’s federal judges, some of whom have been singled out for their rulings by Trump’s high-profile supporters.

Maryland judges are handling the second-highest number of lawsuits against the Trump administration of any federal court district in the U.S.

The attention on typically publicity-shy judges has been jarring at times. After U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson temporarily blocked executive orders ending federal support for diversity, equity and inclusion programs, top Trump lieutenant Elon Musk called for Abelson’s impeachment in a post on social media.

Libs of TikTok, which runs influential far-right social media accounts known for spreading hateful conspiracy theories, shared a photo of U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman after she ruled against the Trump administration in multiple lawsuits, including one over an executive order that would have ended birthright citizenship. The post has 1.4 million views.

The response alarms legal observers, who say escalating attacks on judges violate long-held norms and threaten judicial independence.

“For anyone in the executive branch to argue to impeach a judge because you disagree with their opinion violates every principle of the American system since its founding,” said Michael Meyerson, a professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law who studies American legal history and constitutional law.

Reuters reports that U.S. Marshals have warned federal judges of “unusually high threat levels” amid the criticism from Musk and other Trump administration allies. Two New York federal judges are receiving heightened security after ruling against Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency — which is not an actual government department — as it slashed federal programs and jobs while operating with questionable legal authority, according to Reuters.

Several federal judges in the D.C. area have also had pizzas sent anonymously to their homes, according to the report, and law enforcement is interpreting that as a threatening sign intended to show that the judges’ addresses are known.

The chief deputy clerk for the U.S. District Court in Maryland did not respond to an email seeking comment for this story.

A previous Reuters investigation found that judges handling Trump-related cases saw an “unprecedented wave” of threats, many of which mirrored Trump’s own statements about judges. The president has launched personal attacks against judges who rule against him, calling them “crooked” on social media and leveling evidence-free accusations of political bias.

Since Trump took office again in January, the courts have emerged as one of the only checks on his actions. More than 100 lawsuits challenging his sweeping executive orders and other moves, many of which are designed to stretch the boundaries of presidential authority, led judges across the United States to hit pause on large swaths of Trump’s agenda — at least temporarily.

A dozen of those lawsuits have been filed in Maryland, which is second only to the District of Columbia for suits against the Trump administration. That makes sense, legal experts said, because Maryland is home to many federal agencies and employees.

In response to the cascade of lawsuits and preliminary rulings, Trump allies have gone on the offensive against federal judges, threatening impeachment proceedings despite their long odds. Impeaching a federal judge requires a majority vote in the U.S. House and conviction requires a two-thirds majority in the U.S. Senate, and Republicans do not hold that many seats. Just eight federal judges have been impeached, convicted and removed from the bench in the country’s history, The New York Times reported, though others under investigation have resigned before they could be removed. In modern times, impeachments of federal judges have typically involved allegations of criminal behavior.

Administration officials have also questioned the courts' authority over Trump, raising concerns about the separation of powers and the rule of law.

In a statement, the Maryland Chapter of the Federal Bar Association denounced attacks on judges.

“As our judges continue to face threats and intimidation, we stand with them,” the organization said. “As actors foreign and domestic spread false information about our judiciary and court orders, we will work to reinforce public confidence in our judicial process. The strength of our democracy depends on our nation’s adherence to the rule of law.”

Meyerson, the University of Baltimore professor, said the calls to remove federal judges are reminiscent of the “Impeach Earl Warren” campaign led by segregationists following the Brown v. Board of Education decision. Warren was chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court when it issued the landmark decision declaring school segregation unconstitutional. He was not impeached.

Meyerson also pointed to President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s effort to “pack” the Supreme Court, or add more justices, in response to unfavorable rulings on New Deal legislation in the 1930s. The effort was widely seen as a political attack on the court, and members of Roosevelt’s own Democratic party killed it in Congress.

“If Republicans learned the lesson of almost 100 years ago, they would do the same,” Meyerson said of today’s Congress, which is controlled by the GOP and has shown little appetite for reining in Trump. “It is not the president’s job to intimidate the court.”

Chief Justice John Roberts, who currently leads the Supreme Court, warned in his 2024 year-end report that threats against judges are an ongoing problem.

“Attempts to intimidate judges for their rulings in cases are inappropriate and should be vigorously opposed,” Roberts wrote. “Public officials certainly have a right to criticize the work of the judiciary, but they should be mindful that intemperance in their statements when it comes to judges may prompt dangerous reactions by others.”

Andre Davis, a former federal judge from Baltimore, said legal institutions need to speak with one voice to condemn “outrageous, disgraceful threats about impeachment and other inappropriate language.”

“It behooves all of us in community to say, ‘No, you don’t attack the judges personally. That’s not acceptable. It’s wrong, and it’s dangerous,‘” Davis said. “The answer is to appeal if you think the judge got it wrong.”

Meyerson said the threats and public challenges may not directly impact judges’ decisions, but could slowly erode the independence of the federal judiciary.

“It’s noise, but judges are human, and judges have been known to cave in, to bend a little, to reduce the heat,” he said. “Even though they are protected by lifetime tenure and, even more, they are protected by their pledge to uphold the Constitution, the constant barrage may very well affect some of the human beings we call judges.”

Correction: This story has been updated to correct the description of the impeachment process.