FOLLOW US

A Modern Threat Masked in Mozzarella

Though harmless at first glance, these unsolicited pizza orders are seen by many within the judiciary as sinister signals: anonymous proof that someone out there knows where they live—and that they’re being watched. The use of Daniel Anderl’s name, in particular, crosses a line for many judges, evoking a tragedy that rocked the judicial community just five years ago.

“These incidents threaten not only judges and their families, but also judicial independence and the rule of law,”Durbin warned in his letter.

Judges have described the deliveries as “alarming,” with one judge saying the tactic was clearly meant to evoke fear rather than feed a craving.

Is the Judiciary the New Front in Political Warfare?

Durbin isn’t alone in his concern. Legal analysts and judicial watchdogs warn that this phenomenon may mark a disturbing shift in how adversaries apply pressure to the federal bench—by turning their private lives into battlefields.

“This is an ominous escalation. When people are willing to exploit a murdered child’s name to intimidate a judge, they’ve gone beyond protest. Now we’re looking at psychological warfare.” - Samuel Lopez, Legal Analyst | USA Herald

Notably, some of the recipients are reportedly Supreme Court justices. Others are judges actively handling politically charged cases involving the Trump administration. It’s not difficult to imagine the potential implications if such intimidation goes unchecked.

Durbin’s 13 Questions—and the Answers He Demands

Durbin's letter includes a detailed list of 13 specific inquiries for the DOJ and FBI. Among them:

• How many deliveries have occurred since January 2025?
• Have federal judges' addresses been obtained via violations of the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act?
• Are there suspects, and if so, is there evidence of coordination among them?
• Have any prosecutions been initiated?
• What steps have been taken to prevent further incidents?

Durbin is also demanding a staff-level briefing no later than May 20. “It is imperative that those responsible be held accountable to the full extent of the law,” he emphasized.

The U.S. Marshals Service: A Shrinking Shield?

In a surprising twist, Durbin’s letter also references an April 15 internal letter from U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) Acting Director Mark P. Pittella, allegedly offering over 5,000 employees the opportunity to resign.

“In the midst of increasing threats of violence against judges, it is inappropriate and unacceptable to reduce the size of the agency tasked with protecting the federal judiciary and the judicial process,” Durbin asserted.

He’s asking Bondi and Patel not only to stop the shrinkage of USMS, but to commit to expanding it if necessary.