Efforts to boost judicial safety gain steam after shooting

State and federal officials are moving to increase security for judges and their court staffs following high-profile incidents of threats and violence that include the shooting of a judge in Tippecanoe County last month.

On Jan. 18, Tippecanoe County Superior Court Judge Steven Meyer and his wife were targeted at their home in Lafayette. According to court documents, the man accused of shooting the pair has close ties to a high-ranking gang member who was scheduled to go to trial before Meyer just two days after the shooting took place.

Meyer and his wife are on the mend, but court officials say the incident proves just how dangerous the role of judge can be both here in Indiana and across the United States.

“As you work to peacefully resolve more than 1 million cases a year, you must not only feel safe, you must also be safe,” Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Loretta Rush said in a letter to judges across the state shortly after the shooting. “Any violence against a judge or a judge’s family is completely unacceptable. As public servants, you are dedicated to the rule of law.”

While violence against judges remains relatively rare, threats of violence are not.

In fact, 159 of 214 judges that participated in an Indiana Supreme Court survey said they’d been the target of a threat — with 124 judges reporting they’d received more than one threat to their safety or the safety of their loved ones.

“I’ve been a judge since 1999, and I’ve never seen [the threats] crescendo to the extent that it is,” Rush told The Indiana Lawyer. “If you threaten a judge, you’re not just threatening the judge, you’re threatening your community, you’re threatening the rule of law, you’re threatening us living in a free society.”

The Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Court of Appeals have long been searching for ways to help keep state judges safe as they act in their duties as judicial officers.

Last year, the Supreme Court sought a $1.5 million annual appropriation in the state budget to fund court security grants and other efforts across Indiana to improve safety measures in the state’s courtrooms.

Lawmakers did not include the funding in the final budget. But a renewed effort to protect judges and court staff is moving through the Indiana Legislature this year.

Senate Bill 291, which the Senate passed unanimously on Jan. 26, calls for updates to the appellate courts’ existing security system. The bill now moves to the Indiana House.

Under the current framework, the courts rely on police officers to monitor courtroom procedures. If passed, SB 291 would allow both the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals to appoint court marshals to protect judges, court staff and courthouses.

The author, Sen. Scott Baldwin, R-Noblesville, said the bill allows judges to have “unique and special training for their staff that would be more specialized in courtroom security, rather than just general law enforcement.”

Local trial courts fund their own security, and the appellate courts in Indianapolis cannot directly influence how their security is arranged. But SB 291 would allow the state’s appointed court marshals to help provide security guidance to local courts as well as state courts.

Travel concerns

The bill’s actions, which are not expected to increase spending, would also help streamline proper security measures for larger events the courts are involved in, such as when the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals hear oral arguments in locations across the state.

Indiana Supreme Court Justice Christopher Goff said that traveling outside the Statehouse requires “a lot of advanced work in talking to law enforcement in the counties that we’re visiting.” Marshals could help “alert the local law enforcement that they’re going to have some more security needs than they might otherwise have,” he said.

Following the shooting in Tippecanoe County, Rush hosted a webinar for Indiana judges to discuss the incident and to reinforce the efforts the state is making to protect judges.

Rush brought in James Hamilton, a personal security expert and former FBI special agent to participate in the webinar. Speaking later with The Indiana Lawyer, Hamilton emphasized how crucial personal safety is for everyone — and particularly for judges who won’t have 24/7 security protections.

“The counties don’t have that kind of money to assign an officer full time to a judge, and so what are they to do? They’re basically like most of us; they’re on their own,” he said. “And that’s concerning, especially considering the nature of their work.”

Lawmakers are also eyeing a law that New Jersey approved in 2020. Called Daniel’s Law, it prohibits disclosing residential addresses of current and retired judges. The law is named after the son of U.S. District Court Judge Esther Salas. Her son, Daniel Anderl, was killed in the home he shared with his parents by a man believed to be targeting judges.

Baldwin included a provision in SB 291 that is similar to Daniel’s Law and would allow any current or retired state or federal judge to request that a public agency remove or decline to publish any of the individuals’ personal information, including a home address, a birth or marital record, or election finance reports. The protection would also be extended to anyone residing at the same residence as the judge.

Federal support to the states

Other jurisdictions in the United States — including Missouri and Wisconsin — have implemented their own versions of Daniel’s Law.

In Wisconsin, judicial officers can also request that their county’s register of deeds keep certain documents containing personal information from
being disclosed.

Federal legislation working its way through Congress could offer even more assistance to states looking to bolster their own judicial safety efforts.

House Resolution 4602, known as the Countering Threats and Attacks on Our Judges Act, would establish the State Judicial Threat Intelligence and Resource Center, providing technical assistance and research to help state and local courts understand and improve safety measures for judicial officers and other court staff.

The bill is authored by Reps. Lucy McBath, D-Ga., and Michael McCaul, R-Texas, who say the legislation is needed now more than ever.

“This bipartisan bill sends a clear message: Violence or threats against our judicial officers is never acceptable,” McCaul said in a July 2025 press release announcing the bill. “No public servant should have to live in fear for themselves or their families.”

In fiscal year 2024, the U.S. Marshals Service, which provides judicial security measures to federal district courts across the country, investigated more than 800 threats and potential threats to the people it protects.

If H.R. 4602 becomes law, states could receive financial and technical support to develop standardized incident reporting measures and refer to a national database for tracking threats at the local and state level.

Rush, Indiana’s chief justice, supports the bill, as does the National Center for State Courts, of which Rush is a member.

Officials have taken other measures to protect federal courthouses and mitigate any potential threats toward the buildings themselves.

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana confirmed that, as of December 2025, more than $3 million had been set aside for the design and construction of a security project at the Birch Bayh Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse.

Construction is ongoing and includes the addition of break-resistant windows and doors. Funding for the project comes from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts through the General Services Administration, which owns the nation’s federal courthouses.

Rush said that efforts on both the state and federal level are crucial steps to ensure judicial officers can feel safe while upholding the rule of law.

“We’re going to go after it with everything we can to make sure that [judges] feel safe in making their decisions and safe sitting on that bench and their family should feel safe,” she said.•