🔗 Share this article

The US President is not typically known for advice, particularly from foreign leaders who frequently attempt to flatter and admire the US president.

However, El Salvador's authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele has adopted a distinct strategy by urging the White House to follow his example in removing so-called “dishonest judges.”

The call for the president to move against the American court system also received backing from Trump allies, 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.

Unprecedented Risks to Judicial Independence

Experts note that the leader's recent remarks come at a time of unmatched threats to judicial independence and individual judges in the US, and during a period where the Trump administration is using comparable authoritarian tactics employed by rulers in countries such as Turkey, Hungary, India, and Bukele's own El Salvador to weaken government oversight.

The president's social media call last week was just the latest in a string of provocations and allegations he has leveled against the US's legal system, such as a spring claim that the US was “experiencing a judicial coup,” and his mockery of a court's order to stop deportation flights sending accused undocumented individuals to his country's harsh prison system.

Attacks on Oregon Justice

Bukele's demand for removal was also issued during social media attacks on the state's federal judge Judge Immergut by presidential advisor Stephen Miller, former AG Pam Bondi, Elon Musk, and the president himself in a latest media briefing.

The judge had ordered restraining orders preventing Trump from deploying the national guard, first in the state then in California. The president has been eager to dispatch troops into the city, which the president has described as “battle-scarred” based on limited, peaceful demonstrations outside the urban homeland security facility.

Record of Attacking Judges

The advisor, the former AG, and the entrepreneur have a long record of attacking judges who have ruled against presidential directives or otherwise hindered the government's political agenda. Before resuming office this year, the president directed his followers against judges presiding over his civil and criminal trials, who were then deluged with intimidation and harassment.

Monitoring groups, police departments, and the justices have highlighted a increased atmosphere of risks and intimidation in the months since he returned to the presidency.

Rising Risk Data

According to information collected by the federal agency, in the current year through the third quarter, there were over five hundred threats to nearly four hundred federal judges, giving rise to 805 investigations. 2025 has already surpassed the first recorded year, and last year, and is on track to top 2023's high of over six hundred threats.

The dangers are not just happening at the national level. Information by the university's research project shows that there have been at least 59 cases of threats, targeting, surveillance, or physical attacks committed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Analyst Analysis on Threat Sources

Specialists state that the intimidation are a product of the language 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 White House allies and supporters coincide with rising violent posts on social media.” It recorded “a fifty-four percent rise in demands for removal and physical intimidation against judges across digital networks from January to February 2025, the first full month of the president's term.”

Beirich, the founder of the organization, said: “Trump’s warnings against judges have definitely driven online vitriol at judges and calls for impeachment. Attacking the judiciary is one more step in Trump’s advance towards authoritarianism.”

Global Strongman Tactics

That march towards authoritarianism has been well-trodden in recent years in several countries, including by the Salvadoran.

In several years ago, immediately after commencing a second term in the face of constitutional prohibitions, Bukele’s parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the country’s top prosecutor and five justices on the supreme court. The justices, who had angered him by rejecting pandemic policies, were replaced by replacements selected by the leader.

The move mirrored the Hungarian leader's remodeling of Hungary’s court system several years back; Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s court cleanups recently; and attempts 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 seen as efforts to weaken court autonomy in a system that provides no simple method for the executive to remove judges Trump disapproves of.

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

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

Citing examples such as the advisor's persistent claims of nearly limitless executive power, she added: “They openly criticize the courts by repeating over and over that it is not a co-equal branch in the government structure.

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

Leonard said: “Justices' sole safeguard is public trust in the legitimacy of their capacity to make those rulings. Individual threats on top of weakening trust in courts may make judges hesitate about judgments that go against the current administration, which is, of course, highly concerning for judicial review and for the political system.”

Intimidation Tactics

Scheppele, professor of sociology and global studies at Princeton University, has documented the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of the Hungarian and Putin, and has spoken out about escalating dangers to judges in the US.

She highlighted a wave of so-called “harassment deliveries” recently, in which judges have received unsolicited food orders with the recipient listed as a name, the son of Judge Esther Salas, who was killed at the residence in 2020 by a gunman targeting the judge.

“All understands what it means. ‘Your address is known. You are a target,’” Scheppele 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 federal agency. And the former AG has been spearheading the criticism on federal judges.”

Government Goals

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