Trump’s DOJ Investigates Schumer’s Threats to SCOTUS After Assassination Attempt

On March 4, 2020, a single, incendiary speech on the steps of the Supreme Court set into motion a chain of events that now demands accountability at the highest levels of government. Trump's Acting U.S. Attorney Ed Martin’s recent target letter to Senator Chuck Schumer, alerting him to the DOJ’s investigation into that very address of incitement, has laid bare a reckless disregard for the sanctity of our judicial system. The issue is urgent and pressing: a senator's words, delivered with the venom of a demagogue, have not only incited an enraged mob but have now led to a sustained assault on the core institutions that uphold our republic.

On that fateful day in early March, Senator Schumer, standing before the venerable edifice of our Supreme Court, unleashed a tirade aimed directly at Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. With rhetoric that left little to the imagination, he declared,

“I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

Such words, teetering on the brink of inciting imminent violence, were not mere hyperbole. They bore the unmistakable hallmarks of a call to arms—a directive to unleash chaos against those who dare uphold constitutional restraint against progressive excess.

Chief Justice John Roberts swiftly condemned the senator’s remarks, understanding full well the peril inherent in a public official wielding threats as a weapon against the judiciary. Yet, Schumer’s response was as cold as it was defiant; his refusal to apologize signaled a disturbing indifference to the potential consequences of his incitement. In the eyes of a radicalized left, his words were a clarion call—a mandate that energized a movement intent on subverting the rule of law. That incendiary rhetoric morphed into a tangible assault on judicial integrity when, on May 2, 2022, a far-left Supreme Court clerk, likely inspired by Schumer's call to arms, breached the sacred walls of court confidentiality by leaking the draft opinion of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to the press. This act of treachery, cloaked in the language of whistleblowing, was in fact a deliberate stratagem of intimidation and coercion, designed to terrorize conservative justices and undermine the very fabric of judicial independence.

The fallout was immediate and terrifying. Violent mobs, emboldened by a mixture of ideological fervor and lawless zeal, descended upon the homes of conservative justices, flagrantly violating federal law. Notwithstanding the explicit prohibition enshrined in 18 U.S.C. § 1507— which criminalizes the picketing or parading outside a judge’s residence with the intent to influence a decision—the Biden administration, far from enforcing the statute, chose an abdication of duty that effectively made conservative judges targets. This deliberate inaction sent a chilling message: that those who dared to uphold the Constitution were fair game for harassment, if not outright violence.

As the embers of Schumer’s incendiary words smoldered, the situation escalated to near-catastrophic proportions. On June 8, 2022, the connection between words and deeds crystallized when Nicholas Roske, a left-wing extremist, was apprehended outside Justice Kavanaugh’s home. Armed with lethal intent and a cache of weapons, Roske’s actions were a direct manifestation of the storm Schumer had summoned. His confession—that his motive lay in the draft Dobbs decision leaked a mere month earlier—renders a damning portrait of the consequences of inflammatory political rhetoric. It is no hyperbole to assert that Schumer’s words acted as the spark that ignited this blaze of domestic terrorism.

Even as the threat became palpably real, the Biden administration and congressional Democrats showed an alarming reluctance to act decisively. Rather than bolstering security for Supreme Court justices—a move that would have sent a firm message of protection for our constitutional guardians—they instead allowed the situation to fester. Their inaction was not born of bureaucratic incompetence but of a calculated willingness to let fear and chaos rule. By neglecting to safeguard the lives of those charged with upholding our laws, they effectively tacitly endorsed a campaign of terror aimed at dismantling the independence of the judiciary.

Senator Schumer’s culpability in this unfolding drama is as clear as it is damning. His words, delivered with unmistakable intent to provoke, rise to the level of incitement under federal law. They are a direct challenge to the rule of law and, as such, demand prosecution under statutes designed to deter exactly this kind of dangerous rhetoric. Under 18 U.S.C. § 373, his conduct qualifies as solicitation to commit a violent crime—a statute meant to shield our institutions from precisely such reckless provocations. Furthermore, by issuing these threats in the presence of an enraged crowd, Schumer’s actions constitute an obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 1503, as they sought to undermine the independence of our judicial process. The application of 18 U.S.C. § 115, concerning threats against federal officials, further underscores the gravity of his actions—a legal precedent that has historically been applied to those whose transgressions, though far less egregious, nevertheless endangered the fabric of American governance. Lastly, his rhetoric, intended to incite disorder and violence, squarely falls within the ambit of the Anti-Riot Act—a statute whose purpose is to prevent exactly the kind of lawlessness that has now spilled into the streets and neighborhoods of our highest courts.

History offers us ample precedent for holding public officials to account when their actions stray into the realm of criminality. Senators such as Robert Menendez, indicted for bribery and corruption, and Ted Stevens, served as a stern reminder of the consequences of political malfeasance, have both faced legal repercussions for undermining the public trust. Schumer, with his reckless and incendiary words, has similarly betrayed the sacred trust placed in his office. His actions have not only flouted the principles of responsible governance but have also endangered the lives of the very individuals tasked with interpreting the Constitution.

This matter demands prompt and decisive action. No public official, regardless of rank or political affiliation, should ever be considered above the law. The DOJ’s investigation, now thrust into the spotlight by Acting U.S. Attorney Ed Martin’s pointed target letter, is not merely a bureaucratic exercise—it is a vindication of the principle that in America, every citizen, even those in positions of power, must be held accountable for inciting violence and subverting our democratic institutions.

In the grand tradition of American statesmanship, where even the mightiest are subject to the law, it is imperative that Senator Schumer be held responsible for his actions. His inflammatory rhetoric, which clearly served as a catalyst for violence against the judiciary, has set a dangerous precedent that threatens the very foundation of our republic. The rule of law must prevail, and those who seek to undermine it with incendiary rhetoric and blatant incitement must face the full weight of justice. The warning from Acting U.S. Attorney Ed Martin is a clarion call to all who value the integrity of our judicial system: there are consequences for those who dare to threaten the pillars of American democracy.

Let this moment be a reminder—a reminder that our democracy is not a playground for ideological warfare, but a fortress built on the enduring principles of justice, liberty, and the rule of law. Schumer’s whirlwind of incitement may have been ignited by words, but the flames it has unleashed now demand a reckoning. The law is not a tool for political expediency; it is the bulwark that guards the sanctity of our constitutional republic. In holding Schumer accountable, we reaffirm the unassailable truth that no one, not even a senator, stands above the law.

If you don't already please follow @amuse on 𝕏 and subscribe to the Deep Dive podcast.