🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump is not typically known for advice, particularly from international figures who frequently seek to praise and admire the US president.

But, El Salvador's authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele has followed a different strategy by urging the White House to emulate his actions in removing so-called “dishonest judges.”

His appeal for Trump to move against the US judiciary also garnered backing from Maga figures, such as an social media message by former supporter Elon Musk, who has in the past amplified Bukele's calls to oust US judges.

Unprecedented Risks to Court Autonomy

Experts say that the leader's recent intervention come at a time of unmatched dangers to judicial independence and specific justices in the United States, and during a period where the Trump administration is employing comparable authoritarian methods employed by rulers in countries such as Türkiye, the European state, India, and Bukele's own El Salvador to undermine government oversight.

Bukele's social media call last week was one more in a long series of taunts and allegations he has leveled against the American judiciary, including a March claim that the US was “experiencing a court takeover,” and ridicule of a federal judge's order to stop deportation flights transporting accused undocumented individuals to his country's harsh prison system.

Attacks on Federal Judge

The Salvadoran's impeachment call was also made during online attacks on Oregon justice Judge Immergut by presidential advisor Stephen Miller, former AG Bondi, Elon Musk, and Trump himself in a latest media briefing.

Immergut had ordered restraining orders blocking Trump from deploying the national guard, first in Oregon then in the West Coast state. Trump has been pushing to dispatch troops into the city, which the president has described as “battle-scarred” based on small, peaceful demonstrations outside the city's homeland security facility.

History of Targeting Justices

Miller, Bondi, and Musk have a long record of attacking judges who have ruled against presidential directives or in other ways impeded the administration's political agenda. Prior to resuming office this year, the president directed his supporters against judges presiding over his legal cases, who were then inundated with intimidation and abuse.

Watchdog organizations, police departments, and judges themselves have pointed to a heightened atmosphere of risks and intimidation in the months since he returned to the presidency.

Increasing Risk Data

Based on information gathered by the US Marshals Service, in the current year through the end of September, there were over five hundred threats to nearly four hundred federal judges, giving rise to more than eight hundred inquiries. This year has already eclipsed 2022, and last year, and is on track to exceed the previous year's record of over six hundred threats.

The threats are not only happening at the national level. Data from Princeton's Bridging Divides Initiative shows that there have been at least fifty-nine cases of intimidation, harassment, stalking, or physical attacks directed against judges on the local level in the current year.

Analyst Analysis on Root Causes

Specialists state that the intimidation are a product of the rhetoric coming from top government officials.

In May, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a detailed report claiming that “malicious and reckless statements from White House allies and supporters coincide with rising violent posts on online platforms.” It recorded “a fifty-four percent increase in demands for impeachment and violent threats against judges across social media platforms from the first two months 2025, the initial period of Trump’s administration.”

Heidi Beirich, the founder of the organization, said: “Trump’s threats against judges have certainly driven online vitriol at judges and demands for ouster. Targeting the judiciary is another move in the administration's march towards authoritarianism.”

Global Authoritarian Playbook

This progression towards authoritarianism has been common in recent years in multiple countries, such as by Bukele.

In several years ago, right after commencing a second term in the face of legal bans, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to remove the country’s top prosecutor and several justices on the supreme court. The judges, who had provoked his ire by rejecting coronavirus measures, made way for new appointees selected by the leader.

The move mirrored the Hungarian leader's remodeling of the nation's judiciary several years back; Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s court cleanups recently; and efforts at similar moves in Israel and the European country.

Weakening Court Autonomy

Experts explain that the threats and rhetorical attacks in the US can be seen as attempts to weaken judicial independence in a system that offers no easy way for the president to dismiss judges Trump opposes.

Leonard, an academic at the university who has researched democratic decline in democracies, said the Trump administration had taken cues from the examples set by authoritarians abroad.

“The government is observing at these achievements and setbacks. They know they’re not going to be able to enact any legislation that would weaken the courts,” she said.

Citing examples such as Miller’s persistent claims of broad executive power, she noted: “They directly attack the courts by repeating over and over that it is not a co-equal branch in the government structure.

“They continue to redefine the debate by emphasizing their claim that the president has greater authority than this other co-equal branch, which is not how checks and balances work.”

Leonard said: “Judges' sole safeguard is public trust in the legitimacy of their capacity to make those decisions. Personal intimidation on top of eroding trust in courts may make judges hesitate about decisions that go against the sitting government, which is, of course, highly concerning for judicial review and for the political system.”

Intimidation Tactics

Kim Lane Scheppele, professor of sociology and international affairs at Princeton University, has documented the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of the Hungarian and Putin, and has spoken out about escalating threats to judges in the US.

She highlighted a wave of termed “pizza doxxings” recently, in which judges have received unwanted pizza deliveries with the recipient listed as Daniel Anderl, the child of Judge Esther Salas, who was murdered at the judge’s home in 2020 by a assailant aiming at Salas.

“All understands what it means. ‘We know where you live. You are a target,’” the professor said.

“Federal judges are protected by the Secret Service and the Marshals Service. And these are specialized law enforcement that are placed structurally inside the Department of Justice. And the former AG has been leading the criticism on justices.”

Administration Aims

Regarding the administration’s objectives, Scheppele said that “removing a federal judge is highly not going to happen because it’s so hard to do. {Right now|Currently