EXCLUSIVE: Judicial Branch Scrambles To Limit Spillover From Trump’s Executive Branch Rampage

The judicial branch acknowledged to its workforce on Thursday afternoon some of the impacts from Donald Trump’s executive orders and said that it was working to limit the effects.

In internal memos obtained by TPM, typically staid and reserved court administrators inform the judicial branch that they plan to mitigate the effects of what’s going on in the executive branch. In very careful and calculated language, administrators seemingly try to avoid any hint of confrontation or provocation. The closest they come to anything intemperate is conceding that it’s a “highly dynamic situation presenting new issues at a fast pace.”

One of two memos that the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts sent out on Thursday afternoon, titled “Guidance Regarding Recent Executive Branch Actions Impacting Judiciary Facilities And Security,” tells workers that the courts are trying to grapple with efforts that the Trump administration has undertaken to crack down on the federal civil service. These include actions that have spilled over into the judiciary; the memo cites return-to-office orders, which it says may have prompted executive branch agencies to contact courthouses or other judiciary facilities to inquire about using them for potential office space. It also cites a notice from the General Services Administration that it may terminate the leases for some judiciary employees’ workspaces, and the GSA’s freeze on new contracts above $50,000.

The judiciary is an independent, co-equal branch of government that receives funding for its operations from Congress, and which relies on the executive branch for certain functions. The U.S. Treasury cuts judges’ checks, while federal agencies manage its buildings.

The two memos illustrate how the Trump administration’s wanton attempts to break parts of the federal government are sideswiping the judiciary as well. It’s an unprecedented situation that raises serious questions about the judiciary’s constitutional prerogatives, but which, the memos suggest, leave the co-equal branch with few options.

One of the two Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts memos said that the GSA is reviewing whether to terminate the leases on around 160 judiciary-used locations across the country.

Court administrators said in the memo that the courts are in the process of responding to the notice that GSA provided, and will “provide justification for each of these locations and intends to work with GSA to ensure that Judiciary operations in each of these locations can continue undisturbed.”

In another example, the court administrator expressed some alarm that return-to-office mandates will spur some executive branch federal employees to try to work in a judiciary space. Some court units, the memo said, may already have been contacted by agencies or individual employees seeking workspaces.

That, the memo said, would raise “confidentiality and security issues,” while also potentially violating Congress’ decision to fund workspace for judicial, and not executive branch, work.

“For those reasons, court units are advised not to house non-Judiciary employees in Judiciary facilities,” the document reads.

Other elements of Trump administration policy also appear to have sparked concern within the court system. The U.S. Marshals Service is responsible for providing security at courthouses across the country and for executing certain court orders.

But the Marshals are an executive branch agency within the DOJ. Per the memo, the Justice Department directed the Marshals to support the administration’s intense focus on immigration and the border. The Administrative Office emphasizes in its memo that it has been “assured” by Marshals leadership that “security of the Judiciary and the staffing of judicial proceedings” remain the Marshals’ “top priority.”

Another memo, sent earlier on Thursday, addresses apparent concerns that DOGE’s presence within the Office of Personnel Management resulted in court employee data potentially being compromised. That memo mentions that the courts have received “several inquiries” regarding the issue

“We understand you are concerned about your data,” the memo reads. “The Judiciary is neither unique nor immune from the concerns shared by all federal employees regarding their data.”

The document goes on to list records that OPM holds, including Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, home addresses, and other personal information.

The memos are addressed to separate groups of employees. Chief judges were sent the memo regarding GSA issues; they did not appear on the address line for the memo regarding OPM data. In both cases, the memos appeared to have been addressed to the leaders of various divisions within the judiciary.

A spokesperson for the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts declined to comment.