🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump rarely accepts guidance, especially from foreign leaders who frequently attempt to flatter and compliment the American leader.

However, El Salvador's strongman president Bukele has followed a distinct strategy by calling on the White House to follow his example in removing what he terms “dishonest judges.”

The call for Trump to move against the American court system also garnered backing from Trump allies, such as an social media message by one-time close Trump ally the billionaire, who has in the past amplified the Salvadoran's demands to impeach US judges.

Growing Risks to Court Autonomy

Analysts note that the leader's latest intervention occur of unmatched threats to judicial independence and specific justices in the US, and during a period where the Trump administration is employing similar authoritarian tactics used by leaders in nations such as Türkiye, the European state, the Asian nation, and Bukele's own the Central American country to undermine government oversight.

The president's social media call recently was just the latest in a long series of provocations and allegations he has leveled against the US's legal system, including a March claim that the US was “facing a court takeover,” and his mockery of a federal judge's order to stop deportation flights transporting suspected illegal immigrants to his nation's harsh prison system.

Attacks on Federal Judge

The Salvadoran's demand for removal was also issued amid online attacks on Oregon federal judge Karin Immergut by White House aide Stephen Miller, attorney general Bondi, Elon Musk, and the president himself in a recent press gaggle.

The judge had issued restraining orders blocking Trump from deploying the national guard, initially in Oregon then in the West Coast state. The president has been pushing to send soldiers into the city, which the leader has characterized as “battle-scarred” based on small, non-violent demonstrations outside the urban homeland security facility.

History of Targeting Judges

Miller, the former AG, and Musk have a history of attacking judges who have ruled against Trump's executive orders or in other ways hindered the administration's political agenda. Prior to resuming office recently, the president directed his followers against judges presiding over his civil and criminal trials, who were then deluged with intimidation and abuse.

Watchdog organizations, law enforcement agencies, and judges themselves have highlighted a increased climate of threats and intimidation in the period since he re-entered the presidency.

Increasing Risk Data

Based on data collected by the US Marshals Service, in the current year through the third quarter, there were over five hundred threats to nearly four hundred US justices, leading to 805 inquiries. This year has already eclipsed the first recorded year, and last year, and is on track to exceed 2023's high of 630 threats.

The threats are not just happening at the national level. Data from Princeton's research project shows that there have been at least 59 cases of intimidation, harassment, stalking, or violence committed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Expert Insights on Threat Sources

Specialists say that the intimidation are a result of the language coming from senior administration figures.

In May, 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 violent posts on online platforms.” It noted “a fifty-four percent increase in demands for removal and physical intimidation against judges across digital networks from the first two months 2025, the first full month of the president's term.”

Heidi Beirich, the founder of GPAHE, said: “Trump’s threats against judges have definitely driven online vitriol at judges and calls for impeachment. Targeting the judiciary is one more step in the administration's advance towards strongman rule.”

Global Strongman Tactics

That march towards authoritarianism has been well-trodden in recent years in multiple nations, such as by the Salvadoran.

In 2021, right after commencing a second term despite legal bans, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the country’s attorney general and several judges on the supreme court. The justices, who had provoked his ire by ruling against pandemic policies, made way for replacements selected by Bukele.

The action mirrored Viktor Orbán’s overhaul of Hungary’s court system in 2018; the Turkish president's court cleanups in 2019; and efforts at comparable actions in the Middle Eastern state and the European country.

Undermining Court Autonomy

Analysts say that the threats and rhetorical attacks in the US can be seen as efforts to undermine court autonomy in a system that provides no simple method for the president to dismiss judges the administration disapproves of.

Leonard, an academic at Illinois State University who has researched authoritarian backsliding in democracies, said the White House had learned from the examples set by strongmen overseas.

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

Citing instances such as Miller’s persistent claims of broad executive power, she added: “They directly criticize the judiciary by repeating over and over that it is not a co-equal branch in the separation of powers.

“They continue to reframe the debate by emphasizing their argument that the executive has more power than this judicial branch, which is not how separation powers work.”

The professor said: “Judges' only protection is public trust in the authority of their capacity to make those decisions. Individual threats on top of eroding trust in courts may make judges hesitate about decisions that go against the sitting government, which is, of course, massively problematic for judicial review and for the political system.”

Intimidation Tactics

Kim Lane Scheppele, academic of social science and global studies at Princeton University, has documented the use of “authoritarian law” by the likes of Orbán and the Russian, and has spoken out about escalating dangers to judges in the US.

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

“All understands what it means. ‘We know where you live. You are a target,’” the professor said.

“Federal judges are guarded by the presidential protection and the federal police. And these are specialized police units that are placed institutionally inside the federal agency. And the former AG has been leading the attacks on justices.”

Government Goals

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