Federal judge delivers rare response after Trump attacks the daughter of a judge

The New York judge and

Donald Trump's upcoming hush money

trial has made it crystal clear this week

that he is not in the mood for any games

from the former president

or his legal team.

Banning Trump

from attacking

prosecutors, witnesses and jurors.

So Trump has found someone new

to attack Judge Juan Roshan's daughter

in a new post tonight,

he calls her out by name.

Trump goes

after her as a, quote, rabid Trump hater

because she's done work

for Democratic campaigns in the past.

He didn't stop there.

He also accused her of posting

a picture of him behind bars,

which Trump says, quote,

makes it completely impossible

for me to get a fair trial.

I should note, however, that

that is apparently not true

in the New York state courts.

Court system says that long ago

to Judge Morrison's daughter

abandoned that Twitter account

and that it's also not linked

to her email.

Even so, she's a private citizen.

She's not party to this case.

I should note that the gag order

that the judge did

put in place earlier

this week doesn't apply to himself

nor to his family.

Tonight, I want to bring in

senior US District Judge Reggie Walton,

who was nominated for Judgeships

by both Presidents Bush 41 and 43.

And it's great

to have you here, Judge, tonight.

And I just want to say

thank you for joining us.

And I think to a lot of people,

the dangers of attacking a judge

and his family and their family is clear.

I wonder how you would respond

to something like this.

Well, it's very

disconcerting to have someone

making comments about a judge,

and it's particularly problematic

when those comments

are in the form of a threat,

especially if they're directed

at one's family.

I mean, we do these jobs

because we're committed

to the rule of law

and we believe in the rule of law.

And the rule of law

can only function effectively

when we have judges who are prepared

to carry out their duties

without the threat

of potential physical harm.

And, you know, personally,

I mean, what this is like

someone threatened your daughter

once as well.

Yes.

Threatened me one day

and then

the next day called

and made a threat against

against my daughter

and also indicated my address.

So they obviously had done some research

to find out that I had a daughter

and what her name was

and also where I live.

I mean, what's that?

That that must be terrifying.

Well, it is.

But you kind of have to appreciate

that you can't let that impact

on how you live your life

and how you treat litigants

who are before you.

Because even though threats may be made

against you

and against your family,

you still have an obligation to ensure

that everybody who comes into

your courtroom

is treated

fairly regardless of who they are

or what they've done.

But nonetheless,

it is very troubling

because I think it is an attack

on the rule of law

when judges are threatened

and particularly

when their family is threatened.

And it's something that's wrong

and should not happen.

Given that, I mean,

and you said it shouldn't

impact your work,

but it's got to be something

that's always kind of

in the back of your mind

when when you're going to work,

when you're leaving

to have those kinds of threats

hanging out there.

Yeah.

I mean,

unfortunately, it's a reality that

it's not inconceivable

that something could happen.

We always have to hope

that doesn't occur.

But, you know, several years ago,

one of my colleagues up in New Jersey,

her husband was seriously injured

and sadly, her son was killed.

And we had a judge out in Chicago

who someone came after her.

And fortunately,

she was not there,

but her family members were.

And several of them lost their lives.

So it's a reality that we live with.

But you try not

to let it impact on your day to day life.

I don't expect you

to get political here, obviously.

But do you think that's something

that Donald Trump considers

when he posts something like this?

I can't get into someone's

mind to say

whether they appreciate

the impact that they're doing.

But I would think that

he's any reasonable thinking person

would appreciate that

when they say things that can sometimes

resonate with others.

And I think that's particularly true

when you have somebody

who has status in our society

and they make certain statements

that can cause people

to act on those statements,

even if they don't necessarily

intend for someone to do so.

So I think it's very important

that people in positions of authority

be very circumspect

in reference to the things that they say

so that they're not causing others

to act on what they say

and maybe cause injury or death

to somewhat as a result of that.

What do you make of

how the judge here, Judge

John Mershon,

didn't include himself

or his family in the gag order

Yeah, I understand why

he wouldn't do that.

I mean, again,

I think we cannot make ourselves

a part of the case.

I mean, obviously,

we are a part of the case

because we're

presiding over the proceeding,

but we can't make the case

in the issue about us.

And that can be very difficult

but it comes with the territory.

I mean, first and foremost,

when we take the oath of office,

we have an obligation

to make sure

that all parties

in our courtroom

receive a fair adjudication

regardless of who they are,

what their politics are, or what

they've alleged to have done.

And therefore,

I think it's crucial that judges

not make themselves a part of the issue.

So I think the judge did the right thing

by not including himself

in the gag order.

You're someone who

has always been

really straightforward in your assessment

of the former president.

If you read

your comments

when you're

when you're sentencing people,

when you're when you're in these cases,

you once referred to him as a charlatan.

At the sentencing

of a January 6th defendant.

I know you've gotten a lot of those cases

before you.

You said that

you don't think he cares about democracy,

only power

that you once seemed

to suggest you didn't

you weren't sure he'd accept defeat

if you lost in this election.

Do you still feel that way tonight?

You know, I'd rather not comment on that.

I mean, I've made those

you know, the comments

I've made in the context of the sentences

I impose because I'm hoping

that what I say

to the individuals who are in sentencing

will resonate with them

and caused them to rethink

the activity that they engaged in

that brought them before the court

and hopefully deter them

from engaging in further conduct

of that nature in the future.

Have you been

on the receiving end of more threats

since you've had the January 6th

defendants in your court

Yes, I've had more

threats than what used to be the case.

Yes,

I have received

a greater number of threats

as a result of that incident.

And the fact that cases

are arising out of that incident

have ever appeared before me.

I mean, it was rare.

I've been a judge for over 40 years and

this is a new phenomenon.

I'm not saying that

it didn't happen before,

but it was very rare

that I would ever receive

any type of a threat, regardless

of what type of cases I was handling.

And unfortunately, that is no longer

the case.

I know the Marshal Service

has seen a significant increase

in the number of threats against judges,

and I think obviously that's very, very,

very concerning.

You know,

it's rare that we

get to hear here

from a sitting federal judge,

but obviously

this is a gravely important issue.

I wonder what made you

speak out tonight and speak publicly

Well, you know,

I am concerned

because, like I say, we have had judges

who've lost their lives or family members

have lost their lives

as a result of individuals

who have been litigants

in their courtroom.

And I think it's important

in order to preserve our democracy

that we maintain

the rule of law

and the rule that the rule of law

can only be maintained

if we have independent

judicial officers

who are able to do their job and ensure

that the laws are, in fact, enforced

and that the laws are

applied equally to everybody

who appears in our courthouse.

And I think it's important

that as judges, we speak out and,

you know,

say things

in reference to things that conceivably

are going to impact on the process,

because if we

don't have a viable court system

that's able to function efficiently,

then we have tyranny.

And I don't think that would be good

for the future of our country

and the future of democracy

in our country.

Senior Judge Reggie

Walton, it's great to talk to you.

Thank you for joining us here

on The Source today.