My Murdered Son's Name Is Being Used To Threaten Colleagues, NJ Federal Judge Says

NEW JERSEY — A New Jersey federal judge says someone has been sending pizzas anonymously to the houses of her colleagues and their children — using her murdered son's name on the receipt.

Esther Salas, U.S. District Court Judge for New Jersey, told MSNBC and ABC News this week that she and other judges have received pizza deliveries directly to their homes, with at least 10 of them having her son Daniel Anderl's name attached to the order.

Salas is the Newark-based federal judge who presided over the convictions of Real Housewives stars Joe and Teresa Giudice. Her son Daniel was fatally shot at the age of 20 when a gunman, posing as a delivery man, broke into the judge's North Brunswick home in July of 2020. The gunman also injured her husband, Mark Anderl.

The assailant, Roy Den Hollander, had made a career for himself as an anti-feminist lawyer and had a case pending before Judge Salas. Hollander was later found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound.

"People are trying to weaponize my son and his legacy to send out threats and acts of intimidation against judges," Salas told ABC.

Threats to members of the judiciary are nothing new, but statistics from the U.S. Marshals Service (which provides security to federal judges) show that the number of hostile threats and communications directed at judges has more than tripled in the last decade.

'I know where you live'

Salas has pushed for more protection for federal judges since her son's murder, and spearheaded the passage of Daniel's Law in the Garden State — which protects the home addresses and telephone numbers of judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officers from public disclosure.

On Sunday, she said she knew of "hundreds" of anonymously-sent pizzas that have been going out to judges around the nation, as an intimidation tactic.

"We know the significance and the threat of a pizza arriving at a judge's house — they didn't order a pizza, so what's the point?" Salas told MSNBC's Alex Witt. "The point is, someone wants those judges to know, 'I know where you live.'"

In recent weeks, Salas said, these ominous orders have been showing up at the homes of judges' adult children, using Daniel's name as the sender.

“What does that say to those judges?” Salas said. “It says, 'I know where you live. I know where your kids live. And do you want to end up like Judge Salas? Do you want to end up like her son?'"

Salas pointed to members of President Donald Trump's administration who have criticized judges for blocking parts of the president's agenda, threatening impeachment and launching personal attacks. The president himself has called judges "unhinged" and "radical lunatics," while Department of Government Efficiency head Elon Musk has further amplified criticisms on social media.

There has been harsh rhetoric in the past from the Democratic side of the aisle, too — notably in 2020, when New York senator Chuck Schumer said Supreme Court justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch would "pay the price" if they acted to restrict abortion rights. He later walked back those remarks.

No matter the party, Salas called for political leaders to "be champions for justice" and condemn the acts of intimidation, vowing that judges would continue to do their jobs in the face of these threats.

"As troubling as it is, the men and women of the judiciary will continue to do our jobs because we know that justice requires that we do so," she said. "But we need our leaders to stand up for justice, to stand up to these attacks."

New threats require 'evolving response'

Other federal judges who say they've received unsolicited deliveries include appeals judge Michelle J. Childs of the Washington appeals court and district judge James Boasberg, who both serve in Washington, D.C.

Relatives of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett also received anonymous pizza deliveries back in March, as Newsweek reported.

Violence and intimidation are two of the main things that Supreme Court Justice John Roberts said threaten the independence of judges, in his 2024 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary. The Marshals investigated more than 1,000 "serious threats" against federal judges between the years of 2019 to 2024, Roberts said.

"It is regrettable that law enforcement officers must now dedicate significant additional resources to protecting judges, tracking and investigating threats against them, and prosecuting those who cross the line between lawful criticism and unlawful threats or actions," he wrote in the report, which alludes to Anderl's killing.

Roberts also mentioned how intimidation of judges has taken on a different form with the advent of social media, including calls to "dox" judges' telephone numbers and home addresses.

"Attempts to intimidate judges for their rulings in cases are inappropriate and should be vigorously opposed," he wrote.

In March, Judge Richard Sullivan, chair of the Judicial Conference of the United States' Committee on Judicial Security, also said that threats have been rising for years, but are evolving with technology.

"This is not new, but I think that the nature of threats requires an evolving response from the Branch and from the Marshals because of the nature of technology and the potential that dark-web and foreign actors are able to get into this process in a way that wasn't true before," said Sullivan, following a meeting of the Judicial Conference where members discussed security for judges in courthouses and their homes.

Sullivan, whom Trump appointed to the federal appeals court in New York, also cautioned that public officials should be "very careful and responsible" when they make statements about other branches of government and the justice system.

"We have to be mindful of the fact that people react sometimes really inappropriately to things that they've heard without fully understanding what's being said," he told reporters. "So I think all public officials, certainly all constitutional officers, have to recognize that there's a responsibility that comes with speaking carefully and thoughtfully about important topics."

Changes and challenges to Daniel's Law

Daniel's Law allows active and retired federal and state court judges, prosecutors, child protective investigators, and law enforcement members ("Covered Persons") to request that certain personal information be redacted from government or business websites.
The law underwent amendments in 2023, allowing Covered Persons to appoint a third-party representative to submit requests, and also mandated monetary damages for businesses who do not comply with takedown requests within 10 business days.

Those amendments and the law itself have been challenged in court for being too broad or infringing on free speech; the Third Circuit Court of Appeals was scheduled to begin hearings on the law's constitutionality on April 14.

Former Bergen County Prosecutor John Molinelli recently announced the formation of a Public Safety Information Coalition to restore the "original intent" of Daniel's Law saying that the amendments have made compliance "extremely difficult—and in some cases impossible—for many businesses acting in good faith."

But the New Jersey State Policemen's Benevolent Association (PBA) and a host of other police unions have pushed back on Molinelli's efforts, accusing him of cozying up to data brokers who want to see Daniel's Law weakened.

"The data broker industry and their lobbyists could care less about the men and women judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officers whose lives would be put at risk from removing this law,” said State PBA President Peter Andreyev on Wednesday.