🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump rarely accepts counsel, particularly from foreign leaders who often attempt to praise and compliment the American leader.

However, the Central American nation's authoritarian leader Bukele has followed a different approach by calling on the Trump administration to follow his example in removing what he terms “dishonest judges.”

The call for Trump to take action against the US judiciary also received backing from Maga figures, such as an social media message by one-time close Trump ally Elon Musk, who has in the past amplified Bukele's calls to impeach US judges.

Unprecedented Risks to Court Autonomy

Analysts say that Bukele's latest intervention come at a time of unprecedented dangers to judicial independence and individual judges in the US, and during a phase where the Trump administration is employing similar strong-arm methods used by leaders in nations such as Türkiye, the European state, the Asian nation, and his native El Salvador to weaken government oversight.

Bukele's social media call last week was just the latest in a long series of provocations and allegations he has made against the American judiciary, including a spring assertion that the US was “facing a court takeover,” and ridicule of a court's ruling to halt removal operations sending suspected illegal immigrants to his country's brutal correctional facilities.

Attacks on Federal Judge

The Salvadoran's impeachment call was also issued during social media criticism on Oregon federal judge Judge Immergut by presidential advisor Stephen Miller, former AG Pam Bondi, Elon Musk, and the president personally in a recent media briefing.

The judge had ordered injunctions blocking Trump from mobilizing the military reserves, initially in Oregon then in California. Trump has been pushing to dispatch troops into the city, which the president has described as “war-ravaged” based on small, non-violent demonstrations outside the city's federal building.

History of Targeting Judges

Miller, Bondi, and Musk have a long record of criticizing judges who have ruled against presidential directives or in other ways impeded the government's political agenda. Before returning to power recently, the president directed his followers against judges overseeing his civil and criminal trials, who were then deluged with intimidation and abuse.

Watchdog organizations, police departments, and judges themselves have pointed to a heightened climate of risks and intimidation in the months since he re-entered the presidency.

Increasing Threat Statistics

According to data collected by the federal agency, in the current year through the third quarter, there were 562 incidents to 395 federal judges, leading to more than eight hundred inquiries. This year has already eclipsed the first recorded year, and last year, and is on track to top 2023's high of over six hundred threats.

The threats are not just happening at the national level. Data from Princeton's research project indicates that there have been at least 59 cases of intimidation, targeting, surveillance, or violence directed against judges on the local level in 2025.

Expert Insights on Threat Sources

Experts say that the threats are a product of the rhetoric coming from top government officials.

In spring, the watchdog group published a detailed report claiming that “malicious and highly irresponsible statements from White House allies and supporters align with escalating violent posts on social media.” It recorded “a fifty-four percent increase in calls for removal and physical intimidation against judges across digital networks from January to February 2025, the first full month of the president's term.”

Beirich, the founder of the organization, said: “Trump’s warnings against judges have certainly fueled digital abuse at judges and demands for ouster. Targeting the judiciary is another move in the administration's march towards authoritarianism.”

International Strongman Playbook

This progression towards autocracy has been common in the past decade in several nations, including by the Salvadoran.

In several years ago, immediately after commencing a second term despite legal bans, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to remove the country’s top prosecutor and five judges on the constitutional court. The judges, who had angered him by ruling against pandemic policies, were replaced by new appointees hand picked by the leader.

The action mirrored the Hungarian leader's remodeling of the nation's judiciary several years back; the Turkish president's court cleanups in 2019; and attempts at similar moves in the Middle Eastern state and the European country.

Weakening Judicial Independence

Analysts explain that the intimidation and verbal assaults in the US can be viewed as efforts to undermine court autonomy in a structure that offers no easy way for the executive to remove judges the administration disapproves of.

Meghan Leonard, an academic at Illinois State University who has researched authoritarian backsliding in democracies, said the White House had learned 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 pass any legislation that would undermine the courts,” she said.

Pointing to examples such as Miller’s persistent assertions of broad executive power, she noted: “They openly criticize the courts by repeating over and over that it is not a equal branch in the government structure.

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

The professor said: “Justices' only protection is people’s belief in the authority of their ability to make those rulings. Individual threats 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 court oversight and for the political system.”

Coercion Methods

Kim Lane Scheppele, professor of sociology and global studies at the Ivy League school, has documented the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of Orbán and Putin, and has spoken out about escalating threats to judges in the US.

She pointed to a wave of so-called “harassment deliveries” this year, in which judges have received unsolicited pizza deliveries with the customer listed as Daniel Anderl, the child of Judge Esther Salas, who was murdered at the residence in several years ago by a gunman targeting Salas.

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

“US justices are guarded by the presidential protection and the federal police. And those are both specialized police units that sit structurally inside the Department of Justice. And Pam Bondi has been leading the attacks on federal judges.”

Administration Aims

Regarding the administration’s aims, the expert said that “removing a US justice is almost certainly not going to happen because it’s very difficult to do. {Right now|Currently