🔗 Share this article

The US President rarely accepts advice, particularly from foreign leaders who frequently attempt to praise and compliment the US president.

However, the Central American nation's strongman president Nayib Bukele has followed a distinct approach by calling on the Trump administration to emulate his actions in impeaching so-called “dishonest judges.”

His appeal for Trump to move against the US judiciary also received backing from Maga figures, including an X post by former close Trump ally the billionaire, who has in the past amplified the Salvadoran's calls to oust US judges.

Growing Threats to Court Autonomy

Experts say that Bukele's latest intervention occur of unprecedented threats to judicial independence and specific justices in the United States, and during a period where the Trump administration is using similar authoritarian tactics used by leaders in countries such as Turkey, the European state, India, and Bukele's own El Salvador to weaken democratic accountability.

The president's online call recently was one more in a long series of provocations and allegations he has leveled against the US's legal system, including a spring assertion that the US was “facing a court takeover,” and ridicule of a federal judge's ruling to halt deportation flights sending accused illegal immigrants to his country's harsh prison system.

Attacks on Federal Judge

The Salvadoran's impeachment call was also made amid social media criticism on the state's justice Karin Immergut by presidential advisor Miller, former AG Pam Bondi, Musk, and Trump personally in a recent media briefing.

Immergut had ordered restraining orders blocking the administration from deploying the military reserves, first in the state then in California. The president has been eager to send troops into the city, which the president has described as “war-ravaged” based on limited, non-violent demonstrations outside the city's federal building.

History of Attacking Justices

The advisor, Bondi, and the entrepreneur have a history of criticizing judges who have ruled against presidential directives or in other ways hindered the administration's political agenda. Prior to resuming office this year, the president directed his supporters against judges presiding over his legal cases, who were then inundated with threats and abuse.

Watchdog organizations, law enforcement agencies, and judges themselves have pointed to a increased climate of risks and coercion in the period since he returned to the presidency.

Rising Threat Statistics

Based on data collected by the US Marshals Service, in 2025 through the third quarter, there were over five hundred incidents to nearly four hundred US justices, giving rise to more than eight hundred inquiries. This year has already surpassed 2022, and last year, and is on track to top 2023's record of 630 reported incidents.

The threats are not just happening at the national level. Data from the university's Bridging Divides Initiative indicates that there have been at least 59 cases of intimidation, targeting, surveillance, or physical attacks committed against judges on the local level in the current year.

Analyst Insights on Root Causes

Specialists say that the threats are a result of the rhetoric coming from senior administration figures.

In May, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a detailed report alleging that “harmful and highly irresponsible statements from Trump administration members and allies align with rising violent posts on online platforms.” It noted “a 54% rise in demands for removal and physical intimidation against judges across social media platforms from the first two months 2025, the first full month of the president's term.”

Beirich, the founder of GPAHE, said: “Trump’s warnings against judges have definitely driven online vitriol at judges and demands for ouster. Targeting the judiciary is one more step in the administration's march towards authoritarianism.”

International Authoritarian Tactics

This progression towards autocracy has been well-trodden in recent years in several countries, such as by Bukele.

In several years ago, right after starting a new term in the face of legal bans, the president's allies in congress voted to dismiss the country’s attorney general and several justices on the constitutional court. The justices, who had angered him by ruling against coronavirus measures, were replaced by new appointees selected by Bukele.

The action mirrored the Hungarian leader's remodeling of Hungary’s court system several years back; the Turkish president's court cleanups in 2019; and efforts at comparable actions in the Middle Eastern state and Poland.

Undermining Judicial Independence

Experts explain that the threats and rhetorical attacks in the US can be viewed as efforts to weaken court autonomy in a system that offers no easy way for the president to dismiss judges the administration opposes.

Meghan Leonard, an academic at the university who has studied authoritarian backsliding in free nations, said the White House had taken cues from the models set by strongmen abroad.

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

Citing examples such as Miller’s persistent claims of nearly limitless presidential authority, she noted: “They openly attack the courts by stating repeatedly 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 greater authority than this judicial branch, which is not how separation powers work.”

Leonard said: “Justices' only protection is people’s belief in the legitimacy of their ability to make those decisions. Personal intimidation on top of eroding institutional legitimacy may make judges think twice about judgments that go against the sitting government, which is, of course, highly concerning for judicial review and for the political system.”

Intimidation Tactics

Kim Lane Scheppele, academic of social science and international affairs at the Ivy League school, has documented the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of Orbán and Putin, and has warned about escalating threats to judges in the US.

She pointed to a series of so-called “harassment deliveries” recently, in which judges have received unwanted food orders with the customer listed as Daniel Anderl, the son of Justice Salas, who was murdered at the judge’s home in several years ago by a gunman aiming at the judge.

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

“Federal judges are protected by the presidential protection and the federal police. And those are both dedicated law enforcement that are placed institutionally inside the Department of Justice. And the former AG has been spearheading the criticism on federal judges.”

Government Goals

On the administration’s aims, 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