'Taking a Toll': Privacy protections for judges, civil servants are needed, House says
In 2021, federal judges, court employees and jurors received more than 4,500 threats and other inappropriate communications, according to the ABA. (Image from Shutterstock)
Security for judges, courts and civil servants was one of the most-discussed topics by attendees of the 2025 ABA Midyear Meeting in Phoenix, and it was a concern reflected in resolutions approved by the House of Delegates.
One such measure was Resolution 202, introduced by the Government and Public Sector Lawyers Division. It urges government entities to adopt legislation and policies to prevent the disclosure of personally identifiable information of active and former officials and employees as well as the family members who live in their homes.
Resolution 202 says protected information should include home addresses and be disclosed only if an individual gives consent. The resolution also asks bar associations not to publish personally identifiable information of government officials, employees and their family members in membership directories or online databases without their consent.”We should not have to live in fear,” Darcee Siegel, a delegate from the Government and Public Sector Lawyers Division, said when introducing the measure. “Violence and threats of violence are taking a toll on our institutions and our civil servants.”
In 2021, federal judges, court employees and jurors received more than 4,500 threats and other inappropriate communications, according to the resolution’s report. That same year, members of Congress received more than 9,600 threats.
State and local judges and government workers also have reported threats and been the targets of violence, the report adds. In one high-profile incident in October 2023, Washington County Circuit Court Judge Andrew Wilkinson was shot in the driveway of his Maryland home by a man who had lost custody of his children at an earlier hearing. Wilkinson died at the hospital.
Resolution 202 builds on several measures the House has adopted to protect judges and other public officials. Another judicial security measure, Resolution 201, also was introduced and approved during the House session. It urges jurisdictions to conduct individualized reviews of their current court security measures and identify what might be needed to enhance those measures.
In August, the ABA House called on Congress to enact legislation that establishes a State Judicial Threat Intelligence and Resource Center. It would provide technical assistance and training on state and local judicial security; monitor threats; develop standards for incident reporting; and create a national database that tracks and shares threat information.
In 2021, the House passed a resolution in support of the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act, which was later passed by Congress with bipartisan support.
The law is named after U.S. District Judge Esther Salas’ 20-year-old son, who was shot and killed at her home in New Jersey the previous year. The measure makes it more difficult for violent individuals to find judges’ addresses and personal information online.
The House overwhelmingly adopted Resolution 202. It was co-sponsored by the Judicial Division, the Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice, the Section of State and Local Government Law, the Standing Committee on Gun Violence and the Standing Committee on Public Education.
“There truly is no higher calling than working for the government, and for … us, including myself, our work is our career, not just a job,” Siegel said. “Society cannot function without public servants, and thus we must take every effort to protect those individuals and their families.”
Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.
