🔗 Share this article

The US President rarely accepts advice, particularly from foreign leaders who frequently seek to flatter and compliment the American leader.

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

His appeal for the president to move against the American court system also garnered backing from Trump allies, including an social media message by one-time close Trump ally the billionaire, who has previously boosted the Salvadoran's demands to oust US judges.

Unprecedented Threats to Court Autonomy

Experts say that Bukele's latest intervention come at a time of unprecedented threats to judicial independence and specific justices in the United States, and during a period where the Trump administration is employing comparable authoritarian tactics used by leaders in nations such as Türkiye, Hungary, India, and Bukele's own the Central American country to undermine government oversight.

The president's social media statement last week was just the latest in a string of taunts and allegations he has leveled against the American judiciary, including a spring claim that the US was “experiencing a judicial coup,” and his mockery of a court's order to stop removal operations transporting accused illegal immigrants to his country's harsh prison system.

Criticism on Federal Judge

The Salvadoran's impeachment call was also made during social media criticism on Oregon federal judge Judge Immergut by presidential advisor Miller, attorney general Bondi, Elon Musk, and the president personally in a latest press gaggle.

The judge had ordered restraining orders blocking the administration from deploying the military reserves, first in Oregon then in the West Coast state. The president has been pushing to dispatch troops into Portland, which the leader has characterized as “battle-scarred” based on small, peaceful demonstrations outside the city's federal building.

History of Targeting Justices

Miller, the former AG, and Musk have a long record of attacking judges who have ruled against presidential directives or otherwise impeded the government's policy goals. Before returning to power this year, the president urged his followers against judges presiding over his legal cases, who were then inundated with intimidation and harassment.

Watchdog organizations, police departments, and judges themselves have pointed to a increased climate of risks and intimidation in the period since he returned to the presidency.

Increasing Threat Statistics

Based on information gathered by the US Marshals Service, in 2025 through the end of September, there were over five hundred incidents to 395 federal judges, giving rise to 805 investigations. This year has already eclipsed the first recorded year, and last year, and is likely to top 2023's record of over six hundred threats.

The threats are not only happening at the national level. Data from Princeton's research project indicates that there have been at least 59 instances of intimidation, harassment, surveillance, or physical attacks directed against judges on the local level in the current year.

Analyst Analysis on Threat Sources

Specialists state that the threats are a result of the language coming from senior administration figures.

In spring, the watchdog group published a detailed report claiming that “harmful and highly irresponsible statements from White House allies and allies 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 social media platforms from the first two months of this year, the initial period of Trump’s administration.”

Beirich, the co-founder of the organization, said: “The president's warnings against judges have definitely driven digital abuse at judges and demands for ouster. Targeting the courts is another move in Trump’s march towards authoritarianism.”

International Authoritarian Tactics

This progression towards authoritarianism has been common in the past decade in several nations, such as by Bukele.

In 2021, right after starting a new term in the face of constitutional prohibitions, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to remove the country’s attorney general and several justices on the constitutional court. The judges, who had provoked his ire by ruling against coronavirus measures, made way for new appointees hand picked by the leader.

The move echoed the Hungarian leader's overhaul of Hungary’s court system in 2018; Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s judicial purges in 2019; and efforts at similar moves in Israel and the European country.

Undermining Court Autonomy

Analysts explain that the intimidation and rhetorical attacks in the US can be viewed as attempts to weaken court autonomy in a system that provides no simple method for the executive to dismiss judges Trump opposes.

Leonard, an academic at Illinois State University who has studied authoritarian backsliding in democracies, said the Trump administration had learned from the examples set by strongmen abroad.

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

Pointing to instances such as Miller’s relentless assertions of broad presidential authority, she added: “They directly attack the judiciary by stating repeatedly that it is not a equal branch in the separation of powers.

“They continue to reframe the debate by repeating their claim that the executive has greater authority than this judicial branch, which is not how checks and balances work.”

The professor said: “Judges' only protection is people’s belief in the authority of their capacity to make those decisions. Personal intimidation on top of eroding trust in courts may make judges hesitate about judgments that go against the current administration, which is, of course, highly concerning for court oversight and for democracy.”

Intimidation Tactics

Kim Lane Scheppele, professor of sociology and international affairs at the Ivy League school, has written about the use of “autocratic legalism” by the such as the Hungarian and the Russian, and has warned about rising dangers to judges in the US.

She pointed to a wave of so-called “harassment deliveries” this year, in which judges have received unwanted food orders with the customer listed as a name, the son of Judge Esther Salas, who was murdered at the judge’s home in several years ago by a gunman aiming at the judge.

“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 dedicated police units that are placed structurally inside the federal agency. And the former AG has been spearheading the criticism on federal judges.”

Administration Aims

On the government's aims, Scheppele said that “impeaching a federal judge is highly not going to happen because it’s so hard to do. {Right now|Currently