🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump does not usually take guidance, especially from international figures who often attempt to flatter and admire the US president.

But, El Salvador's authoritarian leader Bukele has followed a different strategy by calling on the White House to emulate his actions in impeaching what he terms “dishonest judges.”

His appeal for the president to take action against the American court system also garnered support from Maga figures, such as an social media message by one-time close Trump ally Elon Musk, who has previously boosted the Salvadoran's calls to oust US judges.

Unprecedented Threats to Court Autonomy

Analysts say that Bukele's recent remarks occur of unmatched threats to court autonomy and specific justices in the United States, and during a period where the president's team is using similar strong-arm methods used by rulers in countries such as Turkey, Hungary, the Asian nation, and Bukele's own the Central American country to weaken government oversight.

Bukele's social media statement last week was one more in a long series of taunts and claims he has made against the American judiciary, including a March claim that the US was “experiencing a court takeover,” and his mockery of a court's ruling to stop removal operations transporting accused illegal immigrants to his country's harsh correctional facilities.

Criticism on Oregon Justice

Bukele's demand for removal was also made during social media criticism on Oregon justice Karin Immergut by White House aide Stephen Miller, attorney general Bondi, Elon Musk, and Trump personally in a latest media briefing.

The judge had issued restraining orders preventing the administration from mobilizing the military reserves, initially in the state then in the West Coast state. The president has been pushing to send troops into the city, which the leader has described as “battle-scarred” based on small, peaceful demonstrations outside the city's federal building.

Record of Targeting Judges

Miller, Bondi, and Musk have a long record of attacking judges who have blocked presidential directives or otherwise hindered the government's policy goals. Before resuming office this year, the president directed his followers against judges presiding over his civil and criminal trials, who were then deluged with threats and harassment.

Watchdog organizations, police departments, and the justices have highlighted a heightened climate of threats and intimidation in the period since he re-entered the White House.

Increasing Threat Statistics

Based on data gathered by the US Marshals Service, in 2025 through the end of September, there were over five hundred threats to nearly four hundred US justices, giving rise to more than eight hundred inquiries. 2025 has already eclipsed 2022, and last year, and is on track to exceed the previous year's high of over six hundred threats.

The threats are not only happening at the federal level. Information by Princeton's Bridging Divides Initiative shows that there have been at least fifty-nine instances of intimidation, harassment, stalking, or physical attacks directed against judges on the local level in the current year.

Expert Insights on Root Causes

Experts say that the intimidation are a product of the language coming from top government officials.

In May, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a detailed report claiming that “malicious and reckless statements from Trump administration members and allies coincide with rising aggressive 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 of this year, the first full month of the president's term.”

Heidi Beirich, the founder of the organization, said: “Trump’s threats against judges have certainly driven digital abuse at judges and demands for ouster. Attacking the judiciary is one more step in Trump’s advance towards strongman rule.”

International Authoritarian Playbook

That march towards authoritarianism has been common in the past decade in several countries, such as by Bukele.

In several years ago, immediately after commencing a new term despite legal bans, Bukele’s parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the nation's attorney general and several judges on the constitutional court. The justices, who had provoked his ire by rejecting coronavirus measures, were replaced by replacements selected by Bukele.

The move echoed Viktor Orbán’s remodeling of Hungary’s court system in 2018; the Turkish president's judicial purges in 2019; and efforts at similar moves in the Middle Eastern state and Poland.

Weakening Court Autonomy

Experts say that the intimidation and rhetorical attacks in the US can be seen as attempts to undermine court autonomy in a structure that offers no easy way for the president to dismiss judges Trump opposes.

Meghan Leonard, an associate professor at the university who has researched democratic decline in democracies, said the Trump administration had learned from the examples set by authoritarians overseas.

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

Citing examples such as Miller’s relentless claims of nearly limitless presidential authority, she noted: “They directly attack the judiciary by repeating over and over that it is not a co-equal branch in the separation of powers.

“They persist in reframe the debate by emphasizing their argument that the executive has more power than this other co-equal branch, which is not how checks and balances work.”

Leonard said: “Justices' only protection is people’s belief in the authority of their capacity to make those rulings. Personal intimidation on top of weakening institutional legitimacy may make judges think twice about decisions that go against the sitting government, which is, of course, highly concerning for court oversight and for the political system.”

Coercion Methods

Kim Lane Scheppele, academic of social science and global studies at the Ivy League school, has written about the use of “autocratic legalism” by the such as Orbán and Putin, 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 Daniel Anderl, the son of Justice Salas, who was killed at the judge’s home in several years ago by a assailant targeting the judge.

“All understands what it means. ‘We know where you live. We’re coming for you,’” the professor said.

“Federal judges are protected by the presidential protection and the federal police. And these are dedicated law enforcement that are placed institutionally inside the Department of Justice. And Pam Bondi has been spearheading the criticism on justices.”

Government Goals

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