🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump rarely accepts guidance, especially from foreign leaders who often seek to flatter and admire the American leader.

However, the Central American nation's authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele has followed a distinct strategy by urging the Trump administration to follow his example in removing so-called “dishonest judges.”

The call for Trump to take action against the American court system also received backing from Maga figures, including an X post by one-time supporter Elon Musk, who has previously boosted the Salvadoran's demands to impeach US judges.

Growing Threats to Judicial Independence

Experts note that Bukele's latest remarks come at a time of unprecedented threats to court autonomy and individual judges in the US, and during a period where the Trump administration is employing similar strong-arm tactics used by leaders in nations such as Turkey, Hungary, India, and his native the Central American country to undermine government oversight.

The president's social media call last week was just the latest in a long series of taunts and claims he has leveled against the American judiciary, including a spring assertion that the US was “experiencing a court takeover,” and his mockery of a federal judge's ruling to stop removal operations sending suspected illegal immigrants to his country's brutal correctional facilities.

Attacks on Oregon Justice

The Salvadoran's demand for removal was also issued amid social media criticism on Oregon federal judge Karin Immergut by White House aide Stephen Miller, former AG Bondi, Musk, and Trump himself in a latest press gaggle.

Immergut had ordered restraining orders blocking the administration from mobilizing the national guard, first in the state then in California. The president has been pushing to send troops into the city, which the leader has characterized as “battle-scarred” based on limited, non-violent protests outside the city's homeland security facility.

Record of Targeting Judges

The advisor, the former AG, and Musk have a history of criticizing judges who have ruled against presidential directives or otherwise hindered the government's policy goals. Before resuming office recently, the president directed his followers against judges overseeing his legal cases, who were then deluged with intimidation and abuse.

Monitoring groups, law enforcement agencies, and the justices have pointed to a heightened atmosphere of threats and intimidation in the months since he returned to the presidency.

Rising Threat Statistics

Based on information gathered by the US Marshals Service, 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 2022, and last year, and is on track to exceed the previous year's record of over six hundred threats.

The dangers are not just happening at the national level. Data from Princeton's research project indicates that there have been at least 59 cases of threats, targeting, surveillance, or physical attacks committed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Expert Analysis on Root Causes

Specialists state that the intimidation are a product of the rhetoric coming from top government officials.

In spring, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a detailed report alleging that “harmful and reckless statements from White House allies and supporters coincide with rising violent posts on social media.” It noted “a fifty-four percent increase in calls 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 co-founder of the organization, said: “The president's warnings against judges have definitely fueled digital abuse at judges and demands for impeachment. Targeting the courts is another move in the administration's advance towards authoritarianism.”

International Strongman Tactics

This progression towards authoritarianism has been common in the past decade in multiple countries, such as by the Salvadoran.

In 2021, immediately after starting a second term in the face of constitutional prohibitions, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the country’s attorney general and five judges on the constitutional court. The judges, who had provoked his ire by rejecting coronavirus measures, were replaced by new appointees selected by the leader.

The action echoed the Hungarian leader's overhaul of Hungary’s court system several years back; the Turkish president's court cleanups recently; and efforts at similar moves in the Middle Eastern state and Poland.

Weakening Judicial Independence

Experts explain that the intimidation and rhetorical attacks in the US can be viewed as efforts to weaken court autonomy in a system that provides no simple method for the executive to remove judges the administration disapproves of.

Leonard, an academic at Illinois State University who has studied democratic decline in democracies, said the Trump administration had taken cues from the examples set by authoritarians abroad.

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

Pointing to instances such as the advisor's relentless assertions of nearly limitless executive power, she added: “They openly attack the courts by stating repeatedly that it is not a equal branch in the government structure.

“They persist in redefine the debate by repeating their claim that the executive has greater authority than this other co-equal branch, which is not how checks and balances work.”

Leonard said: “Judges' sole safeguard is people’s belief in the legitimacy of their capacity to make those rulings. Personal intimidation on top of weakening trust in courts may make judges think twice about decisions that go against the sitting government, which is, of course, massively problematic for court oversight and for democracy.”

Intimidation Tactics

Kim Lane 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 Putin, and has warned about rising dangers to judges in the US.

She pointed to a series of so-called “pizza doxxings” recently, in which judges have received unsolicited food orders with the recipient listed as a name, the child of Justice Salas, who was murdered at the residence in 2020 by a gunman aiming at Salas.

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

“US justices are guarded by the presidential protection and the Marshals Service. And these are specialized law enforcement that are placed structurally inside the federal agency. And Pam Bondi has been leading the criticism on federal judges.”

Government Goals

Regarding the government's aims, Scheppele said that “impeaching a US justice is highly not going to happen because it’s very difficult to do. {Right now|Currently