🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump is not typically known for counsel, particularly from international figures who frequently seek to flatter and compliment the US president.

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

His appeal for Trump to take action against the American court system also received backing from Trump allies, including an X post by former supporter Elon Musk, who has in the past boosted Bukele's calls to oust US judges.

Unprecedented Threats to Judicial Independence

Analysts note that the leader's latest intervention come at a time of unmatched dangers to court autonomy and individual judges in the US, and during a phase where the Trump administration is employing similar authoritarian tactics used by rulers in nations such as Türkiye, the European state, India, and his native El Salvador to weaken democratic accountability.

The president's social media statement recently was one more in a long series of taunts and allegations he has leveled against the American judiciary, including a spring assertion that the US was “experiencing a court takeover,” and his mockery of a court's ruling to stop removal operations sending suspected illegal immigrants to his nation's harsh prison system.

Criticism on Oregon Justice

Bukele's impeachment call was also made amid social media attacks on Oregon federal judge Judge Immergut by presidential advisor Miller, former AG Bondi, Musk, and the president personally in a recent media briefing.

The judge had issued restraining orders blocking the administration from mobilizing the national guard, first in the state then in the West Coast state. Trump has been pushing to send soldiers into the city, which the leader has described as “battle-scarred” based on limited, peaceful demonstrations outside the urban homeland security facility.

History of Attacking Judges

The advisor, the former AG, and the entrepreneur have a long record of attacking judges who have ruled against presidential directives or in other ways impeded the administration's policy goals. Prior to resuming office recently, Trump directed his supporters against judges presiding over his civil and criminal trials, who were then inundated with intimidation and harassment.

Monitoring groups, law enforcement agencies, and judges themselves have highlighted a heightened climate of threats and coercion in the period since he re-entered the presidency.

Increasing Threat Statistics

Based on information collected by the US Marshals Service, in the current year through the third quarter, there were 562 threats to 395 US justices, leading to more than eight hundred inquiries. 2025 has already surpassed 2022, and last year, and is on track to exceed 2023's high of over six hundred reported incidents.

The dangers are not just happening at the federal level. Data from the university's Bridging Divides Initiative indicates that there have been at least 59 cases of intimidation, harassment, surveillance, or violence committed against judges on the state and municipal levels in 2025.

Expert Insights on Threat Sources

Experts state that the threats are a result of the language coming from top government officials.

In May, the watchdog group published a detailed report alleging that “harmful and highly irresponsible statements from White House allies and supporters coincide with escalating aggressive posts on online platforms.” It noted “a 54% rise in calls for impeachment and violent threats against judges across digital networks from the first two months 2025, the initial period of the president's term.”

Beirich, the co-founder of the organization, said: “Trump’s threats against judges have definitely fueled digital abuse at judges and demands for ouster. Attacking the judiciary is another move in the administration's advance towards authoritarianism.”

Global Authoritarian Playbook

That march towards authoritarianism has been well-trodden in the past decade in several countries, such as by the Salvadoran.

In 2021, right after commencing a new term despite constitutional prohibitions, Bukele’s allies in congress voted to remove the country’s attorney general and several justices on the supreme court. The justices, who had angered him by ruling against coronavirus measures, made way for new appointees selected by Bukele.

The action mirrored Viktor Orbán’s remodeling of the nation's judiciary in 2018; Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s court cleanups recently; and attempts at similar moves in Israel and the European country.

Weakening Judicial Independence

Analysts say 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 the administration opposes.

Leonard, an academic at Illinois State University who has studied democratic decline in free nations, said the White House had learned from the models set by authoritarians overseas.

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

Citing examples such as the advisor's relentless assertions of broad executive power, she noted: “They openly criticize the judiciary by stating over and over that it is not a co-equal branch in the separation of powers.

“They continue to reframe the discussion by repeating their claim that the president has more power than this judicial branch, which is not how separation powers work.”

Leonard said: “Justices' sole safeguard is public trust in the legitimacy of their capacity to make those rulings. Individual threats on top of eroding institutional legitimacy may make judges think twice about decisions that go against the current administration, which is, of course, highly concerning for court oversight and for democracy.”

Intimidation Tactics

Scheppele, professor of social science and international affairs at Princeton University, has written about the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of Orbán and the Russian, and has spoken out about escalating threats to judges in the US.

She highlighted a wave of so-called “harassment deliveries” recently, in which judges have received unwanted pizza deliveries with the customer listed as a name, the son of Justice Salas, who was killed at the judge’s home in several years ago by a gunman aiming at Salas.

“Everyone knows what it means. ‘Your address is known. We’re coming for you,’” Scheppele said.

“Federal judges are guarded by the presidential protection and the Marshals Service. And these are specialized law enforcement that are placed institutionally inside the Department of Justice. And Pam Bondi has been spearheading the criticism on federal judges.”

Administration Aims

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