🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump does not usually take guidance, particularly from international figures who frequently seek to flatter and admire the American leader.

However, El Salvador's strongman president Bukele has adopted a different approach by urging the White House to follow his example in impeaching what he terms “dishonest judges.”

His appeal for Trump to take action against the US judiciary also garnered backing from Maga figures, such as an X post by former close Trump ally Elon Musk, who has in the past boosted Bukele's demands to impeach US judges.

Unprecedented Risks to Court Autonomy

Analysts say that Bukele's latest intervention occur of unmatched threats to court autonomy and specific justices in the US, 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 weaken democratic accountability.

The president's social media call last week was one more in a long series of provocations and allegations he has leveled against the American judiciary, including a March assertion that the US was “experiencing a court takeover,” and his mockery of a federal judge's order to halt removal operations sending accused illegal immigrants to his country's harsh correctional facilities.

Criticism on Federal Judge

Bukele's demand for removal was also issued during social media criticism on Oregon federal judge Karin Immergut by presidential advisor Stephen Miller, attorney general Bondi, Musk, and Trump personally in a recent media briefing.

Immergut had issued restraining orders preventing the administration from deploying the military reserves, first in Oregon then in the West Coast state. Trump has been eager to dispatch troops into Portland, which the president has characterized as “war-ravaged” based on small, peaceful protests outside the city's federal building.

Record of Targeting Justices

Miller, Bondi, and the entrepreneur have a history of attacking judges who have ruled against presidential directives or otherwise hindered the administration's policy goals. Prior to resuming office recently, the president urged his followers against judges presiding over his legal cases, who were then inundated with intimidation and harassment.

Monitoring groups, law enforcement agencies, and the justices have pointed to a heightened climate of risks and intimidation in the period since he returned to the presidency.

Rising Threat Statistics

Based on information collected by the federal agency, in 2025 through the end of September, there were over five hundred threats to nearly four hundred US justices, leading to 805 investigations. This year has already eclipsed 2022, and 2024, and is likely to top 2023's high of over six hundred threats.

The threats are not only happening at the national level. Information by Princeton's Bridging Divides Initiative shows that there have been at least fifty-nine cases of threats, targeting, surveillance, or violence directed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Analyst Insights on Threat Sources

Specialists say that the intimidation are a product of the language coming from top government officials.

In May, the watchdog group published a detailed report alleging that “malicious and reckless statements from Trump administration members and supporters coincide with rising aggressive posts on online platforms.” It recorded “a fifty-four percent increase in demands for removal and violent threats against judges across social media platforms from the first two months 2025, the initial period of the president's term.”

Heidi Beirich, the founder of the organization, said: “The president's warnings against judges have definitely fueled digital abuse at judges and demands for impeachment. Attacking the judiciary is one more step in the administration's march towards strongman rule.”

Global Strongman Playbook

That march towards authoritarianism has been well-trodden in recent years in several nations, including by the Salvadoran.

In several years ago, right after starting a new term in the face of constitutional prohibitions, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to remove the nation's top prosecutor and several justices on the supreme court. The judges, who had angered him by ruling against coronavirus measures, made way for new appointees selected by Bukele.

The move mirrored Viktor Orbán’s overhaul of Hungary’s court system in 2018; the Turkish president's court cleanups recently; and attempts at similar moves in the Middle Eastern state and the European country.

Weakening Judicial Independence

Experts explain that the threats and rhetorical attacks in the US can be seen as attempts to undermine judicial independence in a system that provides no simple method for the executive to dismiss judges Trump disapproves of.

Leonard, an associate professor at Illinois State University who has studied authoritarian backsliding in free nations, said the Trump administration had learned from the models set by authoritarians abroad.

“The government is looking around 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.

Pointing to examples such as Miller’s persistent claims of broad executive power, she added: “They directly attack the judiciary by stating repeatedly that it is not a equal branch in the separation of powers.

“They persist in reframe the discussion by repeating their claim that the president has greater authority than this judicial branch, which is not how checks and balances work.”

The professor said: “Justices' 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, massively problematic for judicial review and for democracy.”

Coercion Methods

Scheppele, professor of social science and global studies at the Ivy League school, has documented the use of “authoritarian law” by the likes of the Hungarian and the Russian, and has spoken out about rising threats to judges in the US.

She pointed to a series of termed “harassment deliveries” recently, in which judges have received unwanted pizza deliveries with the recipient listed as Daniel Anderl, the child of Justice Salas, who was killed at the residence in several years ago by a assailant aiming at Salas.

“Everyone understands what it means. ‘We know where you live. We’re coming for you,’” Scheppele said.

“Federal judges are guarded by the presidential protection and the federal police. And these are specialized law enforcement that sit institutionally inside the federal agency. And the former AG has been spearheading the criticism on federal judges.”

Administration Aims

Regarding the government's aims, the expert said that “removing a federal judge is highly not going to happen because it’s very difficult to do. {Right now|Currently