🔗 Share this article

The US President is not typically known for guidance, especially from international figures who frequently attempt to praise and compliment the American leader.

But, El Salvador's authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele has followed a distinct strategy by urging the Trump administration to follow his example in removing what he terms “corrupt judges.”

His appeal for the president to take action against the US judiciary also received support from Trump allies, including an social media message by one-time close Trump ally the billionaire, who has in the past boosted the Salvadoran's demands to impeach US judges.

Unprecedented Risks to Court Autonomy

Experts note that the leader's latest intervention come at a time of unmatched dangers to judicial independence and specific justices in the US, and during a phase where the president's team is using similar authoritarian tactics used by leaders in countries such as Turkey, Hungary, the Asian nation, and his native El Salvador to undermine government oversight.

The president'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 “experiencing a court takeover,” and ridicule of a court's order to halt removal operations sending accused illegal immigrants to his country's harsh prison system.

Attacks on Oregon Justice

Bukele's impeachment call was also issued amid online attacks on Oregon federal judge Judge Immergut by White House aide Stephen Miller, former AG Pam Bondi, Musk, and the president himself in a recent media briefing.

The judge had ordered restraining orders preventing Trump from mobilizing the national guard, first in the state then in California. Trump has been pushing to dispatch soldiers into Portland, which the leader has characterized as “war-ravaged” based on limited, non-violent demonstrations outside the urban homeland security facility.

Record of Attacking Judges

The advisor, the former AG, and Musk have a history of attacking judges who have ruled against presidential directives or otherwise impeded the government's political agenda. Prior to returning to power recently, Trump urged his supporters against judges overseeing his civil and criminal trials, who were then inundated with threats and harassment.

Monitoring groups, law enforcement agencies, and judges themselves have pointed to a increased atmosphere of risks and intimidation in the months since he re-entered the White House.

Rising Risk Data

Based on data collected by the US Marshals Service, in 2025 through the third quarter, there were 562 threats to 395 federal judges, leading to 805 investigations. 2025 has already surpassed 2022, and last year, and is on track to top 2023's record of over six hundred threats.

The dangers are not just happening at the federal level. Information by Princeton's Bridging Divides Initiative indicates that there have been at least 59 instances of threats, harassment, surveillance, or violence committed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Expert Insights on Threat Sources

Specialists state that the intimidation are a product of the language coming from senior administration figures.

In spring, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a detailed report alleging that “harmful and highly irresponsible statements from White House allies and supporters coincide with escalating violent posts on social media.” It noted “a fifty-four percent rise in calls for impeachment and violent threats against judges across social media platforms from the first two months of this year, the first full month of Trump’s administration.”

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

International Strongman Playbook

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

In several years ago, right after starting a new term despite constitutional prohibitions, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the nation's top prosecutor and several justices on the constitutional court. The justices, who had provoked his ire by rejecting pandemic policies, were replaced by replacements selected by Bukele.

The action mirrored the Hungarian leader's remodeling of the nation's judiciary in 2018; the Turkish president's court cleanups in 2019; and attempts at similar moves in Israel and the European country.

Undermining Court Autonomy

Analysts say that the threats and rhetorical attacks in the US can be viewed as attempts to undermine court autonomy in a system that offers no easy way for the president to remove judges the administration disapproves of.

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

“The government 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 courts,” she said.

Citing instances such as the advisor's relentless assertions of broad presidential authority, she added: “They openly criticize the judiciary by stating repeatedly that it is not a equal branch in the separation of powers.

“They persist in reframe the debate 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: “Judges' only protection is public trust in the authority of their capacity to make those decisions. Personal intimidation on top of eroding institutional legitimacy may make judges hesitate about judgments that go against the current administration, which is, of course, highly concerning for judicial review and for democracy.”

Intimidation Tactics

Scheppele, professor of social science and global studies at the Ivy League school, has documented the use of “autocratic legalism” by the such as Orbán and the Russian, and has warned about rising threats to judges in the US.

She highlighted a series of so-called “pizza doxxings” this year, in which judges have received unwanted food orders with the recipient listed as Daniel Anderl, the son of Judge Esther Salas, who was killed at the residence in 2020 by a assailant aiming at the judge.

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

“US justices are protected by the presidential protection and the Marshals Service. And these are dedicated police units that sit institutionally inside the federal agency. And Pam Bondi has been leading the criticism on justices.”

Administration Aims

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