🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump is not typically known for advice, particularly from international figures who often seek to flatter and compliment the US president.

However, El Salvador's strongman president Nayib Bukele has adopted a distinct approach by urging the Trump administration to follow his example in removing so-called “corrupt judges.”

His appeal for Trump to take action against the US judiciary also garnered backing from Trump allies, such as an X post by former supporter the billionaire, who has in the past boosted the Salvadoran's demands to oust US judges.

Growing Risks to Court Autonomy

Analysts say that the leader's recent intervention occur of unmatched threats to court autonomy and individual judges in the United States, and during a period where the Trump administration is employing similar authoritarian tactics used by leaders in countries such as Turkey, the European state, India, and Bukele's own El Salvador to undermine government oversight.

Bukele's social media call last week was just the latest in a long series of taunts and claims he has made against the American judiciary, such as a March assertion that the US was “facing a court takeover,” and ridicule of a federal judge's ruling to halt removal operations transporting accused undocumented individuals to his country's brutal correctional facilities.

Criticism on Federal Judge

The Salvadoran's demand for removal was also issued amid online criticism on Oregon federal judge Karin Immergut by presidential advisor Miller, former AG Bondi, Musk, and Trump himself in a recent media briefing.

The judge had issued restraining orders preventing the administration from mobilizing the military reserves, initially in the state then in California. Trump has been pushing to send troops into Portland, which the leader has described as “war-ravaged” based on small, non-violent protests outside the city's federal building.

Record of Attacking Judges

Miller, the former AG, and the entrepreneur have a history of criticizing judges who have blocked Trump's executive orders or in other ways impeded the government's political agenda. Before returning to power this year, the president directed his supporters against judges presiding over his legal cases, who were then deluged with intimidation and harassment.

Watchdog organizations, law enforcement agencies, and the justices have pointed to a heightened climate of risks and coercion in the period since he re-entered the presidency.

Increasing Threat Statistics

Based on data gathered by the US Marshals Service, in 2025 through the end of September, there were over five hundred incidents to nearly four hundred federal judges, giving rise to 805 inquiries. 2025 has already surpassed the first recorded year, and last year, and is likely to exceed the previous year's record of over six hundred reported incidents.

The threats are not just happening at the national level. Information by the university's Bridging Divides Initiative shows that there have been at least fifty-nine cases of intimidation, harassment, surveillance, or physical attacks committed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Analyst Analysis on Root Causes

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

In May, the watchdog group published a detailed report claiming that “malicious and reckless statements from Trump administration members and allies align with escalating violent posts on social media.” It noted “a 54% increase in demands for impeachment and physical intimidation against judges across digital networks from January to February of this year, the initial period 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 calls for ouster. Attacking the courts is one more step in the administration's advance towards authoritarianism.”

International Authoritarian Playbook

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

In several years ago, right after commencing a new term in the face of constitutional prohibitions, Bukele’s parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the country’s top prosecutor and five justices on the constitutional court. The justices, who had angered him by rejecting pandemic policies, made way for new appointees hand picked by Bukele.

The move echoed the Hungarian leader's remodeling of Hungary’s court system in 2018; the Turkish president's court cleanups recently; and efforts at comparable actions in the Middle Eastern state and Poland.

Weakening Judicial Independence

Experts say that the threats and verbal assaults in the US can be viewed as efforts to undermine judicial independence in a structure that provides no simple method for the executive to remove judges the administration disapproves of.

Meghan Leonard, an academic at the university who has studied authoritarian backsliding in free nations, said the Trump administration had taken cues from the examples set by strongmen overseas.

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

Citing examples such as the advisor's relentless claims of broad executive power, she added: “They directly criticize the courts by repeating over and over that it is not a equal branch in the separation of powers.

“They persist in reframe the discussion by repeating their claim that the executive has greater authority than this other co-equal branch, which is not how checks and balances work.”

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

Intimidation Tactics

Scheppele, academic of sociology and international affairs at Princeton University, has written about the use of “autocratic legalism” by the such as the Hungarian and the Russian, and has spoken out about escalating threats to judges in the US.

She pointed to a series of termed “pizza doxxings” this year, in which judges have received unwanted food orders with the recipient listed as a name, the child of Justice Salas, who was murdered at the residence in several years ago by a assailant targeting the judge.

“Everyone knows what it means. ‘We know where you live. We’re coming for you,’” Scheppele said.

“Federal judges are protected by the presidential protection and the federal police. And those are both specialized police units that sit institutionally inside the Department of Justice. And the former AG has been spearheading the criticism on federal judges.”

Administration Aims

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