🔗 Share this article

The US President does not usually take guidance, especially from international figures who frequently attempt to praise and admire the US president.

But, El Salvador's authoritarian leader Bukele has followed a distinct approach by calling on the Trump administration to follow his example in removing so-called “dishonest judges.”

The call for Trump to move against the US judiciary also received support from Maga figures, including an X post by one-time supporter Elon Musk, who has in the past amplified Bukele's calls to oust US judges.

Growing Threats to Court Autonomy

Experts say that the leader's latest intervention occur of unprecedented dangers to court autonomy and specific justices in the United States, and during a period where the president's team is using comparable authoritarian methods employed by rulers in countries such as Turkey, Hungary, India, and his native the Central American country to weaken democratic accountability.

Bukele's online call recently was just the latest in a long series of provocations and claims he has leveled against the US's legal system, including a March assertion that the US was “experiencing a court takeover,” and ridicule of a court's order to halt deportation flights sending suspected illegal immigrants to his country's harsh correctional facilities.

Attacks on Oregon Justice

Bukele's impeachment call was also issued during social media attacks on the state's federal judge Judge Immergut by White House aide Miller, attorney general Bondi, Musk, and Trump personally in a recent press gaggle.

Immergut had ordered restraining orders blocking Trump from mobilizing the military reserves, initially in the state then in the West Coast state. The president has been pushing to send troops into Portland, which the leader has characterized as “battle-scarred” based on limited, peaceful protests outside the urban federal building.

History of Targeting Judges

Miller, Bondi, and Musk have a history of attacking judges who have ruled against Trump's executive orders or otherwise hindered the administration's policy goals. Prior to returning to power this year, Trump urged his supporters against judges presiding over his legal cases, who were then inundated with threats and abuse.

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

Increasing Threat Statistics

According to information gathered by the federal agency, in the current year through the end of September, there were over five hundred threats to nearly four hundred US justices, giving rise to more than eight hundred inquiries. 2025 has already eclipsed the first recorded year, and 2024, and is likely to exceed the previous year's high of over six hundred threats.

The dangers are not only happening at the national level. Information by the university's Bridging Divides Initiative indicates that there have been at least 59 instances of threats, targeting, surveillance, or physical attacks directed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Analyst Insights on Threat Sources

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

In May, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a detailed report alleging that “malicious and reckless statements from Trump administration members and supporters coincide with rising aggressive posts on social media.” It recorded “a fifty-four percent increase in demands for removal and physical intimidation against judges across digital networks from January to February 2025, the initial period of Trump’s administration.”

Heidi Beirich, the founder of GPAHE, said: “The president's warnings against judges have definitely driven online vitriol at judges and calls for impeachment. Targeting the judiciary is one more step in the administration's march towards strongman rule.”

International Strongman Tactics

This progression towards authoritarianism has been common in recent years in several nations, such as by the Salvadoran.

In 2021, immediately after starting a new term in the face of legal bans, Bukele’s parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the country’s attorney general and five justices on the constitutional court. The judges, who had provoked his ire by ruling against coronavirus measures, made way for replacements hand picked by the leader.

The move echoed Viktor Orbán’s remodeling of the nation's judiciary in 2018; Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s court cleanups in 2019; and efforts at comparable actions in Israel and the European country.

Weakening Court Autonomy

Analysts explain that the threats and rhetorical attacks in the US can be seen as attempts to undermine court autonomy in a structure that provides no simple method for the executive to remove judges Trump opposes.

Leonard, an academic at the university who has studied authoritarian backsliding in free nations, said the Trump administration had taken cues from the models set by authoritarians overseas.

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

Pointing to instances such as Miller’s relentless assertions of nearly limitless executive power, she noted: “They directly attack the courts by repeating over and over that it is not a co-equal branch in the separation of powers.

“They persist in reframe the debate by emphasizing their argument that the president has greater authority than this other co-equal branch, which is not how separation powers work.”

The professor said: “Justices' only protection is people’s belief in the legitimacy of their ability to make those decisions. Individual threats on top of eroding institutional legitimacy may make judges hesitate about judgments that go against the sitting government, which is, of course, highly concerning for judicial review and for democracy.”

Coercion Methods

Scheppele, professor of sociology and global studies at the Ivy League school, has written about the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of the Hungarian and Putin, and has spoken out about rising threats to judges in the US.

She highlighted a series of termed “harassment deliveries” this year, in which judges have received unwanted food orders with the customer listed as Daniel Anderl, the child of Justice Salas, who was killed at the judge’s home in several years ago by a assailant targeting Salas.

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

“US justices are protected by the Secret Service and the Marshals Service. And those are both specialized law enforcement that are placed institutionally inside the Department of Justice. And Pam Bondi has been spearheading the criticism on justices.”

Administration Aims

On the government's aims, the expert said that “removing a federal judge is almost certainly not going to happen because it’s very difficult to do. {Right now|Currently