🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump is not typically known for guidance, particularly from foreign leaders who frequently attempt to praise and admire the US president.

However, the Central American nation's authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele has adopted a different approach by calling on the Trump administration to emulate his actions in removing so-called “dishonest judges.”

The call for Trump to move against the American court system also received support from Maga figures, including an social media message by one-time close Trump ally Elon Musk, who has previously amplified Bukele's demands to impeach US judges.

Unprecedented Risks to Court Autonomy

Analysts say that the leader's recent remarks come at a time of unmatched dangers to judicial independence and specific justices in the United States, and during a period where the Trump administration is employing comparable authoritarian methods employed by leaders in nations such as Turkey, the European state, India, and his native the Central American country to undermine democratic accountability.

The president's online statement last week was one more in a long series of provocations and claims he has leveled against the American judiciary, including a March claim that the US was “experiencing a judicial coup,” and ridicule of a federal judge's order to halt deportation flights transporting suspected undocumented individuals to his country's brutal correctional facilities.

Criticism on Federal Judge

The Salvadoran's impeachment call was also made during online criticism on Oregon federal judge Karin Immergut by presidential advisor Miller, former AG Pam Bondi, Elon Musk, and Trump himself in a latest press gaggle.

The judge had issued injunctions preventing the administration from mobilizing the national guard, first in the state then in the West Coast state. The president has been pushing to send soldiers into Portland, which the president has described as “battle-scarred” based on small, non-violent demonstrations outside the city's federal building.

History of Targeting Justices

The advisor, Bondi, and the entrepreneur have a history of criticizing judges who have blocked presidential directives or in other ways impeded the government's political agenda. Prior to returning to power recently, the president urged his followers against judges overseeing his civil and criminal trials, who were then inundated with intimidation and abuse.

Monitoring groups, police departments, and judges themselves have pointed to a heightened atmosphere of threats and coercion in the months since he re-entered the presidency.

Increasing Threat Statistics

According to information gathered by the US Marshals Service, in 2025 through the third quarter, there were over five hundred incidents to nearly four hundred federal judges, giving rise to more than eight hundred investigations. This year has already eclipsed 2022, and 2024, and is likely to top the previous year's high of over six hundred threats.

The dangers are not only happening at the federal level. Data from the university's research project indicates that there have been at least 59 instances of threats, harassment, surveillance, or violence directed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Analyst Insights on Root Causes

Experts state that the intimidation are a result of the language coming from senior administration figures.

In spring, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a comprehensive report alleging that “malicious and reckless statements from White House allies and supporters coincide with escalating aggressive posts on social media.” It recorded “a 54% rise in calls for removal and physical intimidation against judges across digital networks from January to February 2025, the first full month of Trump’s administration.”

Heidi Beirich, the founder of the organization, said: “Trump’s threats against judges have definitely driven online vitriol at judges and demands for ouster. Targeting the judiciary is another move in the administration's march towards authoritarianism.”

Global Authoritarian Tactics

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

In 2021, right after commencing a second term in the face of legal bans, Bukele’s parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the nation's top prosecutor and five justices on the constitutional court. The justices, who had provoked his ire by ruling against coronavirus measures, made way for replacements hand picked by Bukele.

The move echoed the Hungarian leader's remodeling of the nation's judiciary several years back; Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s court cleanups recently; and attempts at similar moves in Israel and the European country.

Undermining Judicial Independence

Experts explain that the threats and verbal assaults in the US can be seen as efforts to weaken court autonomy in a system that provides no simple method for the executive to dismiss judges Trump disapproves of.

Leonard, an associate professor at Illinois State University who has researched democratic decline in democracies, said the Trump administration had learned from the models set by authoritarians abroad.

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

Citing examples such as Miller’s persistent assertions of broad presidential authority, she noted: “They openly attack the courts by repeating repeatedly that it is not a co-equal branch in the separation of powers.

“They continue to reframe the discussion by emphasizing their argument that the executive has greater authority than this other co-equal branch, which is not how separation powers 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 eroding institutional legitimacy may make judges hesitate about judgments that go against the current administration, which is, of course, massively problematic for judicial review and for the political system.”

Intimidation Tactics

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

She highlighted a wave of termed “harassment deliveries” this year, in which judges have received unwanted pizza deliveries with the customer listed as a name, the child of Judge Esther Salas, who was murdered at the judge’s home in 2020 by a gunman aiming at the judge.

“Everyone understands what it means. ‘Your address is known. You are a target,’” the professor said.

“US justices are guarded by the Secret Service and the Marshals Service. And these are specialized law enforcement that sit institutionally inside the federal agency. And Pam Bondi has been leading the criticism on justices.”

Administration Aims

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