🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump does not usually take counsel, particularly from international figures who frequently attempt to praise and admire the US president.

But, the Central American nation's authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele has adopted 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 move against the US judiciary also garnered support from Maga figures, such as an X post by one-time supporter Elon Musk, who has previously boosted the Salvadoran's demands to impeach US judges.

Growing Risks to Judicial Independence

Experts say that Bukele's latest remarks occur of unprecedented threats to judicial independence and specific justices in the US, and during a period where the president's team is employing comparable strong-arm tactics used by rulers in countries such as Turkey, the European state, India, and his native the Central American country to weaken democratic accountability.

Bukele's social media call recently was one more in a string of taunts and allegations he has made against the US's legal system, including a spring claim that the US was “facing a court takeover,” and ridicule of a court's order to halt deportation flights sending accused illegal immigrants to his country's brutal correctional facilities.

Attacks on Federal Judge

The Salvadoran's impeachment call was also made amid social media criticism on Oregon justice Judge Immergut by presidential advisor Stephen Miller, former AG Pam Bondi, Elon Musk, and Trump personally in a latest press gaggle.

The judge had issued restraining orders blocking Trump from mobilizing the national guard, first in the state then in the West Coast state. Trump has been pushing to send soldiers into the city, which the president has described as “battle-scarred” based on small, non-violent protests outside the urban federal building.

Record of Targeting Judges

The advisor, Bondi, and Musk have a history of attacking judges who have blocked Trump's executive orders or in other ways hindered the government's policy goals. Before returning to power recently, the president urged his followers against judges presiding over his legal cases, who were then inundated with intimidation and abuse.

Monitoring groups, police departments, and judges themselves have pointed to a increased climate of risks and intimidation in the months since he returned to the White House.

Increasing Risk Data

Based on information gathered by the federal agency, in 2025 through the third quarter, there were over five hundred incidents to nearly four hundred US justices, leading to more than eight hundred inquiries. This year has already surpassed 2022, and last year, and is on track to top the previous year's record of over six hundred threats.

The dangers are not just happening at the federal level. Information by the university's research project indicates that there have been at least fifty-nine cases of intimidation, harassment, surveillance, or violence directed against judges on the local level in 2025.

Analyst Insights on Root Causes

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

In spring, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a comprehensive report alleging that “harmful and highly irresponsible statements from White House allies and allies align with escalating aggressive posts on online platforms.” It noted “a fifty-four percent rise in calls for removal and violent threats against judges across social media platforms from the first two months 2025, the initial period of Trump’s administration.”

Heidi Beirich, the co-founder of GPAHE, said: “The president's warnings against judges have definitely fueled online vitriol at judges and calls for ouster. Targeting the judiciary is another move in the administration's march towards authoritarianism.”

International Authoritarian Playbook

This progression towards autocracy has been well-trodden in the past decade in multiple countries, including by the Salvadoran.

In several years ago, immediately after commencing a new term despite legal bans, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to remove the country’s top prosecutor and several judges on the constitutional court. The judges, who had provoked his ire by ruling against coronavirus measures, made way for replacements selected by the leader.

The move mirrored the Hungarian leader's overhaul of Hungary’s court system several years back; the Turkish president's judicial purges recently; and efforts at comparable actions in the Middle Eastern state and Poland.

Weakening Court Autonomy

Experts say that the threats and verbal assaults in the US can be viewed as attempts to undermine court autonomy in a structure that offers no easy way for the president to dismiss judges the administration opposes.

Meghan Leonard, an associate professor at Illinois State University who has researched authoritarian backsliding in free nations, said the White House had learned from the examples set by strongmen overseas.

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

Citing instances such as Miller’s persistent assertions of nearly limitless executive power, 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 redefine the debate by emphasizing their claim that the president has more power than this judicial branch, which is not how checks and balances work.”

Leonard said: “Judges' sole safeguard is public trust in the legitimacy of their capacity to make those rulings. Personal intimidation on top of eroding institutional legitimacy may make judges hesitate about decisions that go against the sitting government, which is, of course, highly concerning for judicial review and for democracy.”

Intimidation Tactics

Kim Lane Scheppele, academic of social science and international affairs at the Ivy League school, has documented the use of “authoritarian law” by the such as Orbán and the Russian, and has warned about escalating threats to judges in the US.

She pointed to a series of so-called “pizza doxxings” this year, in which judges have received unsolicited food orders with the recipient listed as Daniel Anderl, the son of Justice Salas, who was murdered at the residence in 2020 by a gunman targeting Salas.

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

“US justices are guarded by the presidential protection and the federal police. And those are both specialized law enforcement that sit institutionally inside the federal agency. And Pam Bondi has been leading the attacks on justices.”

Government Goals

Regarding the administration’s aims, Scheppele said that “removing a US justice is almost certainly not going to happen because it’s so hard to do. {Right now|Currently