this post was submitted on 26 May 2025
280 points (99.6% liked)

News

29565 readers
2262 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Federal judges are discussing a proposal that would shift the armed security personnel responsible for their safety away from the Department of Justice (DoJ) and under their own control, as fears mount that the Trump administration is failing to protect them from a rising tide of hostility.

Under the current system, federal judges are protected by the US marshals service, which is managed by the justice department. According to Wall Street Journal, those participating at the March conference expressed worries that Trump might instruct the marshals to withdraw security protection from a judge who ruled against him.

Amid those anxieties, the idea surfaced that federal judges should form their own armed security force. That would involve bringing the US marshals service under the direct control of the head of the judiciary, Chief Justice John Roberts.

top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 101 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Yes. Good. Do this. Then also deputize them to arrest fuckwads who are in extreme contempt of court, and are rampantly violating court orders.

[–] xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

they can’t, under a provision in the “Big Beautiful Bill”

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago

That would need to be affirmed by the courts to matter.

If the rule of law still matters, here is the process:

  1. Judiciary does a thing
  2. Someone harmed by it (i.e. someone with standing, possibly the trump admin) files a suit
  3. Court agrees with the plaintiff
  4. Appeals court declines to hear or agrees with plaintiff
  5. SCOTUS does the same

Now, the plaintiff can also appeal, and they get an injunction by showing immediate and irreparable harm. But generally, the actions can continue while the appeal is pending.

[–] 800XL@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 50 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

the Trump administration is ~~failing to protect them from~~ intentionally subjecting them to a rising tide of hostility.

Fixed it for them. The original statement was akin to saying that the locust swarm is failing to protect the crops from being eaten.

[–] Embargo@lemm.ee 60 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] GuyFawkes@midwest.social 40 points 2 days ago

I mean I don’t NOT smell one.

[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 38 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

🙄 Almost there, little article.

The United States Marshalls protect US assets. Judges are treated as such. But! John Roberts already has a security force called the Marshalls of the Supreme Court. Guess who has authority to deputize Marshalls of the Court?

Yes, a judge. They have constitutional authority to enforce judgements. The real question is why haven't they exercised it.

[–] RedditIsDeddit@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago

that's because the US Marshals fall under the executive branch and guess who controls that

[–] Fontasia@feddit.nl 15 points 1 day ago

I'm reading this as "Do you want the coup now or by the actual army when things have really gone to shit and people really are eating dogs and cats to stay alive?"

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 27 points 2 days ago

[...] fears mount that the Trump administration is failing to protect them from a rising tide of hostility.

It's not a failure to protect. They're not failing at their goals right now. Their goals just no longer align with your goals of [checks notes] living. Maybe you shouldn't have handed over your power so freely, you fucking cowards.

[–] match@pawb.social 2 points 2 days ago

Posse time?