‘This is where we are’: Federal Judge Ana Reyes reports death threats to her family amid Trump attacks

U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes has demanded that the Trump administration explain its treatment of transgender troops and account for its actions in court. On Monday, during a dispute over a Washington golf course, she described another consequence of her work. She’s receiving death threats.

“This is where we are,” Reyes said, according to The Washington Post. “A federal judge is getting death threats over a golf course. I really don’t think that’s what the founders envisioned.”

Reyes, an out lesbian appointed by President Joe Biden, said her mother and brother had contacted her about reports of threats. She also referenced disturbing emails and voicemails. Earlier that day, President Donald Trump called her a “crazed lunatic” and questioned whether she “may be insane.”

Her disclosure places the confrontation over East Potomac Golf Links within a broader crisis of judicial intimidation, one that has brought threats to judges’ doorsteps.

Related: Trump's Justice Department files complaint about lesbian judge hearing trans military case

When threats reach home

In July 2020, a gunman posing as a delivery driver attacked the New Jersey home of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas. He killed her 20-year-old son, Daniel Anderl, and wounded her husband, Mark Anderl. The attacker, lawyer Roy Den Hollander, had appeared before Salas.

Judges have since received unsolicited pizza deliveries at their homes, sometimes ordered in Daniel’s name. They interpret the deliveries as warnings that someone knows where they live, with the murdered young man’s name underscoring the threat.

U.S. District Judge Mark Norris, a Trump appointee in Tennessee, described receiving such a delivery during a March forum, Reuters reported.

Reyes has previously described threats calling for her to be lynched and shot.

“What’s most problematic is that the extraordinary has become ordinary,” she said during a March panel, according to the American Bar Association.

Related: Pete Hegseth may have to testify under oath about his anti-trans slurs. A federal judge put the DOJ on notice

A record of demanding answers

The Advocate previously reported that Reyes’ March 2025 preliminary injunction found the administration’s transgender military ban likely unconstitutional. She described the policy as “soaked in animus and dripping with pretext.” The litigation continues.

At an October 14 hearing covered by The Advocate, Reyes ordered Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to answer written questions concerning his statements targeting transgender people. She warned that inadequate answers could lead to a deposition.

“He has time to tweet,” she said while questioning efforts to shield him from testimony. The administration argues its restrictions concern military readiness and medical qualifications; plaintiffs contend they discriminate against transgender people.

The Justice Department previously filed a misconduct complaint accusing Reyes of bias in that case. In the golf course case, the department sought her recusal, alleging hostility toward the administration. Reyes rejected the request Sunday.

Add these two paragraphs after “Reyes rejected the request Sunday”:

In her October 18 opinion, Reyes rebutted the administration’s bias allegations by documenting months of rulings in its favor. Before October 11, she noted, she had denied nearly a dozen requests for relief and repeatedly praised government attorneys. Her anger followed the government’s decision to remove hundreds of healthy trees after providing notice at 4:55 p.m. before a holiday weekend, with cutting scheduled to begin within 15 hours.

“It is easy to weaponize selective quotations to bring a baseless recusal motion,” she wrote. “But it is much harder to meet the demanding legal standard against a full record.”

Who can a judge believe?

Related: Federal judge dismantles Trump's trans military ban in explosive hearing

The administration also pointed to her handling of Hegseth in the transgender military case as supposed evidence of bias, accusing her of mocking him and threatening to compel his testimony. “Neither is true,” Reyes wrote. She noted that she had rejected plaintiffs’ request for a seven-hour deposition and left open arguments over a limited, one-hour deposition. She said Hegseth had time to post online, record videos, and address military leaders, citing his public activities.“These are facts, not insults," she wrote.

Monday’s hearing exposed conflicting accounts of the redevelopment. Trump announced a November 15 closure and immediate work, while officials could not confirm that timetable.

After crews removed more than 400 trees on October 10, Reyes temporarily halted further cutting. She questioned the government’s assertion that the removal was separate from Trump’s broader project.

“So who do I believe? Do I believe the president of the United States or do I believe you?” she asked a government lawyer.