The American Bar Association has condemned what it described as growing personal attacks, intimidation and threats directed at judges, warning that such conduct undermines judicial independence and weakens public confidence in the rule of law.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/ELLAN.png")
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
The ABA made the position known in a statement issued on Tuesday amid rising tensions between the judiciary and the Trump administration over court rulings on key government policies.
The association criticised recent attacks on judges by government officials and called on public officers, lawyers and citizens to reject rhetoric that targets judges personally or seeks to delegitimise the judiciary because of disagreement with court decisions.
“The American Bar Association strongly condemns personal attacks on judges by government officials and calls on all public officials, lawyers and citizens to reject rhetoric that targets judges or seeks to delegitimize the judiciary because of disagreement with a particular decision,” the statement read.
The ABA said words used by public officials matter, stressing that those in positions of authority have a responsibility to maintain civil discourse and respect the independence and integrity of the courts.
“Words matter. Public officials have a responsibility to engage in civil discourse that respects the independence and integrity of our courts,” it added.
The association said recent social media posts by an unnamed administration official criticising judges by name reflected what it called “the growing pattern of threats, intimidation and personal attacks directed at our judiciary.”
It warned that judges must be allowed to decide cases based on facts, law and the Constitution, not out of fear for their safety or that of their families.
“Judges must be free to decide cases based on the facts, the law and the Constitution — not fear for their personal safety or the safety of their families,” the ABA stated.
The association acknowledged that disagreement with court rulings is part of the constitutional process, but said such disagreements must be expressed through lawful and democratic channels.
“In our constitutional system, disagreement with a court’s decision is both expected and protected. Judicial opinions should be analyzed, debated and, when appropriate, challenged through the appellate process,” the statement said.
The ABA, however, warned that personal attacks, inflammatory rhetoric, baseless accusations and calls for judges to be removed because of their rulings cross a dangerous line.
According to the association, such conduct undermines public confidence in the judiciary, threatens judicial independence and erodes the rule of law.
It further stated that the separation of powers depends on fair and impartial courts that can perform their constitutional duties without political pressure, retaliation or fear.
“The separation of powers depends on fair and impartial courts that can fulfill their constitutional responsibilities free from political pressure, retaliation or fear,” the ABA said.
Describing judicial independence as a non-partisan principle, the association said it remains essential to democracy and public trust in the administration of justice.
“Judicial independence is not a partisan principle. It is a cornerstone of our democracy and essential to preserving public trust in the administration of justice,” it added.
The ABA also urged members of the legal profession to speak up in defence of courts, judges and the rule of law.
“The ABA urges members of the legal profession to speak out in defense of courts, judges and the rule of law,” the statement added.
The association said it remains committed to improving the administration of justice, supporting lawyers and judges, promoting continuing legal education and deepening public understanding of the importance of the rule of law.
The latest statement follows a similar warning issued by the ABA in March after United States Chief Justice John Roberts cautioned that “personally directed hostility is dangerous” and had “gone too far.”
At the time, the ABA said there had been an alarming pattern of rhetoric targeting individual judges with labels such as “crooked” and “out of control,” warning that such language does not merely criticise legal outcomes but seeks to intimidate judges and weaken public faith in the impartiality of the courts.
The association also said it was alarmed by reports of increasing physical threats, assassination plots and harassment directed at judges and their families.
It maintained that the appellate process remains the proper channel for resolving legal disagreements, not personal vilification, intimidation or calls for impeachment.
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
The book also examines Nigeria's legal ecosystem, focusing on the LPELR and NBA AI Guidelines. As a bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE eBook titled: How to Use the AI Features in LegalPedia and LawPavilion.
Ohio Books Ltd praises the publication, stating:
"....this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic."
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACIarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
_______________________________________________________________________
“Order Justice Omolaye-Ajileye’s Electronic Evidence Books Now” — Essential Guides On Evidence Act, Case Law And Digital Proof
