By The Honorable Denise J. Casper
Approximately fifteen years ago, I wrote for this publication about my first year as a newly minted U.S. District Court Judge for the District of Massachusetts (“the Court”). Denise J. Casper, Reflections on My Freshman Year on the Bench, vol. 56 #2, Bos. Bar J. (Spring 2012). It is hard to believe that a decade and a half has passed, but I welcomed the invitation from the Boston Bar Journal to write in these pages again, this time to mark the first anniversary of the start of my service as Chief Judge of the Court.
For those who are less familiar with the statute, 28 U.S.C. § 136, governing the appointment of each federal district court’s Chief Judge, the appointment is not by acclaim or vote of the Court but by seniority and, well, age. I share this background not merely to strike a note of humility but to stress that, for a court of our size, this role falls to a judge who has served for many years. This was true for my immediate predecessors and is also true for me. I have been on the bench long enough to have presided over a range of civil and criminal matters, observed multiple changes in the Court’s composition and to have had the opportunity to work in several aspects of the Court’s governance before my term as Chief Judge began. I think that the perspective that comes with this tenure, and the support of my fellow judges, have helped the Court manage the challenges and changes, and foster opportunities for engagement with the bar, during my first year as Chief Judge.
The challenges that the Court has faced are numerous and many of them are shared by federal and state courts around the country. The budgetary challenges culminated in a lapse of appropriations for the judicial branch this fall. The labeling of this time as a government “shutdown” was a misnomer as to the federal courts where the press of business continued. Sadly, judicial staff as well as federal public defenders and CJA panel members, both of whom provide constitutionally required representation to indigent criminal defendants, went without pay. (Although not paid out of the judiciary budget as the defenders and the CJA panel are, many Assistant U.S. Attorneys also went unpaid during this time as well). We were certainly relieved when a budget for FY2026 was finally adopted at the beginning of this calendar year and, to date, the budget for FY2027, if approved, will result in a 6% cut from required funding, which is much less painful than reductions endured in the recent past.
Budgetary challenges have been coupled with the challenges in the Court’s changing caseload. Since the beginning of 2025, civil filings have dramatically increased due to an influx of immigration habeas petitions challenging detention. The number of these petitions (filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241) filed in 2025 alone totaled 653, dwarfing the totals in prior years. The year-to-date total, through July 26, 2026, is already 1,205 filings. Given that these Section 2241 petitions are focused on challenging detention, they often require expedited attention. The number of these petitions has also changed the balance between civil and criminal cases in our district. Over the past decade, criminal cases have comprised roughly 7% to 15% of our docket. In 2026 YTD (through June 30, 2026), civil cases now account for 95% of the docket and criminal cases comprise only 5% of the total, even as criminal case filings have increased over the past four years and our magistrate judges have seen an increase in the applications for search warrants and other criminal process. The past year has also brought many administrative law and constitutional law challenges to the use of executive branch authority. Many of these cases required expedited attention as some litigants have sought preliminary injunctive relief.
Against this background of budgetary challenges and case demands, the Court has also seen an increase in threats against judges and their family members. As I think any judge will tell you, critique of our work, disagreement with our decisions, and appeals by those unhappy with trial court outcomes come with our public role. Threats of harm, however, to us, our staff and/or loved ones should not. Such threats in our District are not just in the form of physical harm but in the pursuit of impeachment, for which Chief Justice John Roberts has noted, “[f]or more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision” and “[t]he normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.” Chief Justice John Roberts, Public Statement in Response to Press Inquiries (March 18, 2025). Any such actions should remain a deep concern for members of our bar or anyone else committed to the rule of law in a free and just society. We remain appreciative of the U.S. Marshals Service’s tireless engagement in judicial security and the provisions of the federal Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act of 2022, Pub. L. 117–263, (named in memory of the son of our colleague, District Judge Esther Salas, who was murdered by a litigant on the doorstep of their home). Along with the First Circuit and our state court colleagues, we hope the Commonwealth’s legislature will pass the pending Massachusetts Judicial Security Act, which will provide similar protections of personally identifiable information of judges and their families at the state level.
As has been true over the last several years, this past year has been one of change for the Court’s composition. As I have mentioned in other settings, the Court saw five new district judges and two new magistrate judges added to the Court between 2021 and 2024. This past year brings additional changes as Magistrate Judge Katherine A. Robertson retired and Magistrate Judge Christopher L. Morgan was appointed in her stead in the Western Division (Springfield). There will soon be a similar change in our Central Division (Worcester) as Magistrate Judge David H. Hennessy recently announced his retirement (effective May 2027) and the Court will soon announce a selection committee to consider applications for this seat. Sadly, earlier this summer, the Court lost a brilliant jurist with the passing of District Judge Rya W. Zobel, the first woman to serve on our Court. Although she had fully retired a few years ago, many at the bar and on the bench considered her a mentor and friend, including me. Although her legacy of wisdom, wit, and exemplary service will endure, the Court greatly misses her.
In my first year as Chief Judge, the Court has continued the tradition of engagement with the bar and we plan to continue to do so throughout the remainder of my seven-year term. These Court-sponsored events have allowed for the exchange of best practices and discussion of new legal developments such as the Court’s full-day Bench/Bar Conference in September, that featured multiple panels and speakers, and two sessions of the U.S. District Court Forum, featuring a cross-section of the bench addressing questions from practitioners, about criminal practice and civil litigation. The Court has continued its legacy programs including the Judge David S. Nelson Fellowship Program and the Judge Reginald C. Lindsay Fellowship Program, which marked a 30th anniversary and a 16th anniversary, respectively, and the Court Assisted Recovery Effort (“CARE”) Program, a re-entry program for individuals on supervised release who are struggling with substance abuse, which will pass its 20th anniversary this year. This year, we also initiated the Court’s Pro Se Legal Assistance Program, run by Boston College Law School, to improve access to justice for pro se litigants in civil matters. All of these programs were initiated and are led by different judges, all with the support of the full bench and extended Court community.
So, the first year of my term has been a busy one. Although much of my service in this role is responding to what the Court needs to do its important work, I do hope that we continue to find opportunities for innovation and ways to improve access to justice. I also hope that we can continue to engage the bar in discussions about cutting-edge legal developments and innovations in practice, partner in our programming, and encourage continued advocacy for adequate funding for the Court, judicial security, and protection of the rule of law.
Chief Judge Denise J. Casper has served on the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts since 2011 and began her term as Chief Judge in 2025. In 2022, the Boston Bar Association awarded her its Haskell Cohn Distinguished Service Award.
