I’m afraid a judge is going to be killed

United States Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, one of 16 U.S. magistrate judges in the Southern District of Florida, was the judge on duty Aug. 5 when he received the FBI’s application for a search warrant on former President Donald Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago. Reinhart fulfilled his duties by viewing the affidavit of probable cause that accompanied the application, and likely asking pertinent questions regarding any points of clarification.

Reinhart signed the warrant, which led to threats against his religion, character, and life — all too familiar trends. He and judges like him signed up for a job that entails risk, but they didn’t sign up to be killed.

I am a former federal judge who has been on the receiving end of threats that necessitated enhanced protections for me and my family, but those same protections are no longer enough. Radicalized statements and utterly false narratives promulgated by former President Trump and his followers are expediting the need for Congress to take action on judicial security. If we do not implement legislation to provide more protection for federal judges soon, we are going to lose one.

Since he signed the warrant to search Mar-a-Lago, Reinhart’s personal information — including his office and home address — were posted online. This has placed the judge and his family at extreme risk.

We could be doing more to keep them safe. As I write this, the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act sits languishing in Congress. It is named for the son of my former colleague U.S. District Judge Esther Salas of New Jersey, who in 2020 suffered an unspeakable tragedy: Her son was executed by a disgruntled lawyer seeking to kill her in her home.

The bill would, among other things, allow federal judges to redact personal information from government websites, and bar private citizens from publishing the same without permission. If in force, it would have made it illegal for people to post Reinhart’s information online. But the legislation has been persistently blocked by Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) and, despite vigorous lobbying by various groups, has not passed.

“If we do not implement legislation to provide more protection for federal judges soon, we are going to lose one.”

The legislation also provides additional resources for the U.S. Marshals Service, which, as part of its core mission, protects the federal judiciary. These resources will assist the Marshals Service in anticipating and deterring threats to judges. In recent years, the service has witnessed a dramatic rise in what it deems “security incidents” against federal judges, and without greater funding, it cannot adequately investigate and deter these potential threats in a way that makes judges safer.

Enhanced judicial security, however, might still not be enough. Those who hold power and influence must dial down the irresponsible rhetoric that drives people to target judges. Judges rule apolitically and without fear or favor, according to the Rule of Law — a fact that is utterly lost on many. This unclarity is magnified by inflammatory rhetoric that implies that judges are simply politicians in black robes and doing the bidding of their benefactors. They are not.

As an appointee of President George W. Bush, I remember being on the receiving end of political backlash after holding in 2005 that intelligent design could not be taught as science in public schools. The late conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly said that I had “stuck the knife in the backs of those who brought him to the dance.”

All of our elected representatives should strive to avoid misleading the public in this way, because wittingly or not, they are adding to this witch’s brew that produces threats against not only judges but law enforcement personnel as well. After the Mar-a-Lago search, Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) added to the notion that the judicial system is infected by partisanship, saying, “Suddenly we’ve become one of those countries where whoever’s in power uses the tools of the federal government to go after their political opponents.”

» READ MORE: The raid on Trump’s house could set a dangerous precedent

Trump’s acolytes have weaponized everything from Reinhart’s prior criminal defense work to the fact that he is Jewish. There have been scurrilous photoshopped images of the judge on social media appearing to get a foot massage from the former girlfriend of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, as well as antisemitic comments. The latter were of such a nature that the judge’s synagogue canceled its Sabbath services. Worse, Reinhart and his family have been directly threatened. All of this has been a consequence of this magistrate judge’s accepting a random assignment and simply doing his job.

The bottom line is that we are on the cusp of seeing a federal judge killed. I hope and pray this never happens. But I greatly fear it will.

John E. Jones III is the president of Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pa. He previously served as the chief judge of the U.S. Middle District Court of Pennsylvania, where he was appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush in 2002.