Examining the Threat Level of Abigail Jo Shry’s Statements
The CBS News article covers the case of Abigail Jo Shry, a Texas woman charged with making a threatening phone call to a federal judge overseeing a case related to former President Donald Trump. A key question raised by readers is whether Shry posed a genuine threat, given that she admitted she had no intent to act on her words. To ensure accuracy, we analyzed the factual claims presented in the article.
Historical Context
Threats against public officials have become more common in the years following the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. According to law enforcement reports, security concerns have increased for judges and prosecutors handling politically charged cases. The case against Shry falls within this broader pattern of heightened threats, prompting law enforcement to take such statements seriously regardless of intent.
Fact-Checking Specific Claims
Claim #1: Abigail Jo Shry threatened to kill Judge Tanya Chutkan and Representative Sheila Jackson Lee.
Court records confirm that Shry left a threatening voicemail for Judge Chutkan and separately directed threats toward Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee. The U.S. Department of Justice reported that Shry’s message stated, “If President Trump doesn’t get elected in 2024, we are coming to kill you, so tread lightly.” This claim is verified as accurate based on federal charging documents.
Claim #2: Shry admitted to making the call but stated she had no plans to act on the threat.
According to court documents, when questioned by law enforcement, Shry acknowledged making the phone call but denied plans to travel or carry out the threats. She did, however, state that if the congresswoman traveled to her city, “we need to worry.” While this does not indicate an immediate plan for violence, authorities still treated the threats as serious due to broader concerns over escalating political rhetoric and prior attacks on government officials. This claim is also accurate but lacks full context regarding law enforcement’s rationale for intervening.
Claim #3: Law enforcement officials are seeing a rise in threats against federal judges and officials.
Government reports confirm that threats against federal officials have been increasing since 2019. The U.S. Capitol Police reported 9,474 threat investigations in 2024, up from 6,955 cases in 2019. Similarly, the U.S. Marshals Service, which provides security for federal judges, has documented a sharp rise in such cases. This claim is well-supported by official data and is accurate.
Conclusion
The CBS News article presents generally accurate information regarding Abigail Jo Shry’s case, law enforcement’s response, and the broader increase in threats against federal officials. However, the article does not explore in detail why authorities take verbal threats seriously even when the individual claims no immediate intent to act. Given the rise in politically motivated violence, such cases are prosecuted as a deterrent against future threats. While Shry’s words may not have signaled an imminent attack, they contributed to a broader environment of intimidation against public officials.
Stay Informed and Help Combat Misinformation
Want to verify news on your own? Download the DBUNK app today to fact-check articles instantly and stay informed.
Read the original article here.
