A Memphis jury on Wednesday convicted Justin Stiger of threatening to kill a federal judge and two federal prosecutors, the latest in a string of federal cases centered on threats against members of the judiciary. Prosecutors said the threats were made in 2025 and were directed at U.S. District Judge Mark S. Norris and two attorneys with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Memphis. Jurors returned their guilty verdict in federal court after deliberating earlier in the day.
Trial and conviction
The jury found Stiger guilty of making the threats last year, according to the Daily Memphian. That outlet reported that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Tennessee handled the prosecution and that the verdict came down on Feb. 4. Local coverage noted that the conviction followed testimony and evidence focused on the alleged communications and threats that led to the charges.
Judge Norris' security background
Public court filings have previously detailed security concerns involving Judge Norris after a shooting connected to a former law clerk and follow-up discussions with federal investigators, as described in an order posted on Justia. Those filings helped draw wider attention to courthouse security and the risks that federal judges and their staff can face on and off the bench.
Legal context
Federal law makes it a crime to threaten judges and other federal officials. Under 18 U.S.C. § 115, it is illegal to threaten a United States judge or other covered federal official, with penalties of up to 10 years in prison for threats and higher maximum sentences when the conduct involves murder or assault, according to the U.S. Code. Prosecutors often rely on that statute when pushing for prison terms designed to discourage attempts to intimidate the courts.
What happens next
The Daily Memphian report did not list a sentencing date, and publicly available court records also did not immediately show one. Similar federal prosecutions in other parts of the country have resulted in multi-year prison sentences, and the Department of Justice has highlighted comparable cases that ended with multi-year terms. Stiger’s case now returns to federal court for scheduling and, ultimately, a sentencing hearing on a timetable set by the judge.
