🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump does not usually take guidance, particularly from international figures who frequently attempt to praise and admire the US president.

But, El Salvador's strongman president Nayib Bukele has followed a different approach by urging the Trump administration to follow his example in removing so-called “dishonest judges.”

His appeal for Trump to move against the American court system also received support from Maga figures, including an social media message by one-time supporter the billionaire, who has previously amplified the Salvadoran's demands to impeach US judges.

Unprecedented Threats to Court Autonomy

Experts say that the leader's recent remarks come at a time of unmatched threats to judicial independence and specific justices in the United States, and during a phase where the Trump administration is using similar strong-arm methods used by leaders in countries such as Türkiye, Hungary, the Asian nation, and Bukele's own the Central American country to undermine democratic accountability.

The president's online statement recently was just the latest in a long series of taunts and allegations he has leveled against the American judiciary, including a spring claim that the US was “facing a judicial coup,” and ridicule of a court's ruling to halt deportation flights sending accused undocumented individuals to his country's harsh prison system.

Attacks on Federal Judge

Bukele's impeachment call was also made during online attacks on the state's federal judge Karin Immergut by White House aide Miller, attorney general Pam Bondi, Elon Musk, and the president personally in a recent media briefing.

Immergut had issued restraining orders preventing Trump from mobilizing the national guard, first in Oregon then in the West Coast state. Trump has been eager to send troops into Portland, which the leader has described as “battle-scarred” based on small, non-violent protests outside the urban homeland security facility.

History of Targeting Judges

Miller, Bondi, and the entrepreneur have a history of attacking judges who have blocked presidential directives or otherwise impeded the government's political agenda. Prior to returning to power recently, Trump directed his supporters against judges overseeing his legal cases, who were then deluged with intimidation and abuse.

Monitoring groups, police departments, and the justices have highlighted a heightened atmosphere of threats and intimidation in the months since he returned to the presidency.

Increasing Risk Data

Based on data collected by the federal agency, in 2025 through the third quarter, there were over five hundred incidents to 395 federal judges, leading to more than eight hundred inquiries. 2025 has already surpassed 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 federal level. Information by the university's research project indicates that there have been at least 59 instances of intimidation, harassment, surveillance, or physical attacks committed against judges on the local level in 2025.

Expert Insights on Root Causes

Specialists state that the threats are a result of the rhetoric coming from top government officials.

In May, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a comprehensive report claiming that “harmful and reckless statements from Trump administration members and allies coincide with rising aggressive posts on social media.” It noted “a 54% increase in calls for removal and violent threats against judges across digital networks from the first two months 2025, the first full month of the president's term.”

Heidi Beirich, the founder of the organization, said: “Trump’s warnings against judges have certainly driven online vitriol at judges and demands for impeachment. Targeting the judiciary is one more step in the administration's march towards strongman rule.”

International Authoritarian Playbook

That march towards autocracy has been common in recent years in several nations, such as by Bukele.

In several years ago, immediately after commencing a second term despite constitutional prohibitions, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the nation's top prosecutor and five justices on the constitutional court. The justices, who had angered him by ruling against pandemic policies, were replaced by replacements selected by Bukele.

The action 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 Poland.

Undermining Judicial Independence

Experts explain that the intimidation and rhetorical attacks in the US can be seen as attempts to weaken court autonomy in a structure that offers no easy way for the executive to dismiss judges the administration opposes.

Meghan Leonard, an associate professor at the university who has studied authoritarian backsliding in democracies, said the Trump administration had learned from the models set by strongmen overseas.

“The administration is looking around at these successes and setbacks. They know they’re not going to be able to pass any legislation that would undermine the judiciary,” she said.

Citing examples such as the advisor's relentless claims of broad presidential authority, she added: “They openly criticize the judiciary by stating over and over that it is not a equal branch in the government structure.

“They continue to redefine the debate by emphasizing their argument that the executive has more power than this other co-equal branch, which is not how separation powers work.”

The professor said: “Justices' only protection is public trust in the legitimacy of their capacity to make those decisions. Individual threats on top of weakening institutional legitimacy may make judges think twice about decisions that go against the sitting government, which is, of course, highly concerning for court oversight and for democracy.”

Intimidation Tactics

Kim Lane Scheppele, academic of social science and international affairs at Princeton University, has written about the use of “authoritarian law” by the likes of Orbán and the Russian, and has warned about rising dangers to judges in the US.

She highlighted a series of termed “harassment deliveries” recently, in which judges have received unwanted food orders with the recipient listed as Daniel Anderl, the son of Judge Esther Salas, who was murdered at the judge’s home in 2020 by a gunman targeting Salas.

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

“US justices are guarded by the Secret Service and the Marshals Service. And those are both specialized police units that are placed institutionally inside the federal agency. And Pam Bondi has been spearheading the criticism on justices.”

Administration Aims

On the administration’s objectives, 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