A suburban Chicago man faces federal charges after allegedly mailing threatening letters to two U.S. district judges, triggering a multi-agency investigation and setting an arraignment date in Chicago federal court.
James Lebuhn, 65, of Libertyville, Illinois, is charged in federal court with two counts of mailing a threatening communication, a criminal information filed in U.S. District Court in Chicago says. Arraignment is scheduled for March 26, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. before U.S. District Judge Sara L. Ellis. The details in the information allege the mailings were intended to be true threats and were sent in March of last year to judges in Amarillo, Texas, and Fort Pierce, Florida.
The allegations say Lebuhn knowingly sent the letters for the purpose of making a true threat and that he acted with reckless disregard for the substantial risk others would view the communications as threatening. Each count the government brought carries a maximum penalty of five years in federal prison. The filing stresses that an information is not evidence of guilt and that the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The case has drawn support from several federal law enforcement agencies who worked the investigation, according to the court filing. The U.S. Marshals Service, the U.S. Secret Service, and the Federal Protective Service all participated, with assistance from the U.S. Attorney’s Offices in the Northern District of Texas and the Southern District of Florida. The government is represented in Chicago by Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard M. Rothblatt of the Northern District of Illinois.
From a law-and-order perspective, the charged conduct strikes at a basic principle: judges must be able to do their jobs without facing intimidation or threats. Federal judicial officers serve the rule of law, not politics, and threats against them undermine public confidence in the justice system. Prosecutors on the case have underscored a commitment to holding accountable those who try to intimidate public servants on the bench.
In the official statement included with the court filing, U.S. Attorney Andrew S. Boutros made a direct, unvarnished point about the office’s priorities. “The Chicago U.S. Attorney’s Office is committed to holding accountable anyone who seeks to intimidate and instill fear in members of the federal government, including the esteemed public servants on the bench,” said U.S. Attorney Boutros. “When a threat such as this occurs, our Office will find, arrest, and prosecute those responsible to the fullest extent of the law. We are grateful for the close collaboration with the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices in the Northern District of Texas and Southern District of Florida and the fine work they provided in support of this prosecution.”
Ryan Raybould, the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, framed the charges as a warning in a climate where threats of violence are rising. “In today’s times of increasing threats of violence, these criminal charges should serve as a warning to others contemplating such behavior,” said Ryan Raybould, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Texas. “I applaud the investigative efforts of our agents in this District and the prosecution team in the Northern District of Illinois for their outstanding work.”
The legal process now proceeds on a set timetable: the arraignment is the next public step, and any further motions or proceedings will follow federal procedural rules. If the case moves to trial, the government will carry the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and any sentence would be determined under federal statutes and the advisory U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. The filing notes that the Court must impose a reasonable sentence if a conviction is obtained.
The particulars in the court information focus narrowly on the alleged mailings and the sender’s intent and recklessness about how the communications would be perceived. The documents name Amarillo and Fort Pierce as destinations for the letters and place the mailings in March of the previous year. Beyond the charges, the public record at this stage contains limited detail on motive or background, leaving the formal court process to develop the factual record.
For conservatives who stress accountability and secure institutions, the case tests how federal authorities respond to threats against the judiciary. Strong enforcement sends a clear message that threats will not be tolerated and that federal resources will be used to protect judges and the integrity of the courts. That posture aligns with a straightforward view: protect those who enforce the law so the law can be enforced fairly and predictably.
At the same time, core legal protections remain in force for the defendant, including the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair hearing. The criminal information initiates formal charges, but it does not itself resolve guilt or innocence. The case will unfold through established courtroom procedures where evidence, testimony, and legal argument determine the outcome.
As proceedings approach, court filings and scheduled hearings will be the primary source of new information about the alleged mailings and any defense response. For now, the facts in the public court documents center on the two counts of mailing a threatening communication, the agencies involved in the investigation, and the representation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago.
