Do you think assassination attempts on supreme court judges is going to become more common in the US

Historically the US has always had a problem with people trying to assassinate the president. Obama had to beef up his security, Reagan was shot, JFK was shot, Garfield, Lincoln, McKinley, Roosevelt, etc were all either assassinated or wounded during assassination attempts.

Thats not even including the dozen plus presidents who faced serious assassination attempts that were either thwarted or failed.

Generally in the US there aren’t as many assassination attempts against senators and representatives, or against governors. I remember seeing an interview Obama did when he was a senator and him and the journalist were walking around the streets freely. Then Obama was interviewed when he was president and he talked about how free it was to not need so much security back then. Basically meaning, there was less of an assassination threat to him as a senator vs as a president.

But with the SCOTUS passing so many rulings by a 6-3 majority I’m wondering if we will see more assassination attempts against them too. In between overturning Roe, deciding bribery is legal if done after the favor, giving more power to the executive branch, blocking some attempts to prosecute the J6 insurrectionists, I’m wondering if in the coming years there will be more assassination attempts at judges than we’ve seen in the past.

I think they’ve already increased security for SCOTUS judges due to this. But I wonder if it’ll reach the level where a SCOTUS judge has the same level of security as the president.

FWIW I’m not advocating for anything, I’m just wondering if we will see more stochastic terrorism directed at the supreme court.

I’d say they should be worried if some oil tycoon wants to drill for oil on marshland where there are endangered pelicans.

FBI enters the chat.

In case anyone doesn’t catch the reference, it’s to the John Grisham novel The Pelican Brief, also a film starring Julia Roberts and Denzel Washington. In the novel, someone arranges the assassination of two members of the Supreme Court.

I’d say no because right now the majority of the justices and the people who see violence as a political tool are on the same side.

Nailed it.

Just what I was going to say. I’d be far more worried if the court majority was to the left and had just made the (correct) decision that a president is never above the law.

I agree with the sentiment, but the nature of rightwing radicals is that the conservatives on the court are always just one not-quite-reactionary-enough ruling away from some MAGA Robespierre deciding they have betrayed the revolution.

Yeah, I tend to agree but the 2017 baseball shooting was done by a left wing terrorist against conservative congressmen.

Memorable because it goes contrary

There are extreme people on both sides but conservatives tend to go for the violent solution far, far more than the liberals do. It is a distinguishing characteristic between the two.

At a rate of one left wing shooting every seven years, it’s going to take several decades to change the ideological balance of the Court.

Not a great movie:


If The Ellen James Society were a real thing I would expect overturning Roe would have already seen some attempts. But as others have said, groups on the left are less likely to choose violence.

If Thomas gets his wish and convinces the majority to reverse Obergfell I think odds would increase.

Thread winner! :trophy:

And the one verified assassination attempt against a Supreme Court justice since 1889 was against Brett Kavanaugh.

Personally, I’m not even sure that counts. Roske turned himself in peacefully. If he’d just walked away, nobody would’ve ever heard about the “attempt”.

You and nemo are right, political violence is worse among the right wing than the left wing.

I dug up this scientific paper.

A comparison of political violence by left-wing, right-wing, and Islamist extremists in the United States and the world

When compared to individuals associated with a right-wing ideology, individuals adhering to a left-wing ideology had 68% lower odds of engaging in violent (vs. nonviolent) radical behavior (b = −1.15, SE = 0.13, odds ratio [OR] = 0.32, P < 0.001). On the other hand, the difference between individuals motivated by Islamist and right-wing causes was not significant (b = 0.05, SE = 0.14, OR = 1.05, P = 0.747). Expressed in terms of predicted probabilities, the probability of left-wing violent attack was 0.33, that of right-wing violent attack was 0.61, and that of Islamist violent attack was 0.62. These findings remained robust after we controlled for demographic variables (sex, age, education, minority status, immigration status), prior criminal experiences, military experience, and decade in which the perpetrator entered the database.

However Islamist violence is equal to domestic right wing violence, but Islamist violence is also right wing violence. It just is right wing in support of a different religion, ideology, skin color and nationality than domestic US based right wing violence (which is motivated by American nativism, white supremacy, christian nationalism, etc)

And now we’ve wasted our one and have to wait until 2031 for another chance.

The attempt on Trump wasn’t a “left wing” shooting, so it doesn’t count.