🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump does not usually take counsel, particularly from foreign leaders who often attempt to flatter and compliment the American leader.

However, El Salvador's authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele has followed a different approach by urging the Trump administration to follow his example in impeaching so-called “corrupt judges.”

The call for the president to take action against the US judiciary also received backing from Trump allies, such as an X post by former close Trump ally Elon Musk, who has previously amplified the Salvadoran's demands to impeach US judges.

Unprecedented Threats to Court Autonomy

Analysts note that the leader's recent intervention come at a time of unmatched threats to court autonomy and specific justices in the US, and during a period where the president's team is using comparable authoritarian methods used by leaders in countries such as Turkey, Hungary, the Asian nation, and his native El Salvador to undermine government oversight.

Bukele's online statement recently was just the latest in a string of provocations and claims he has made against the US's legal system, including a spring claim that the US was “experiencing a judicial coup,” and ridicule of a court's ruling to halt removal operations transporting suspected undocumented individuals to his country's brutal correctional facilities.

Criticism on Federal Judge

The Salvadoran's impeachment call was also issued amid social media attacks on the state's justice Judge Immergut by White House aide Stephen Miller, former AG Bondi, Musk, and the president himself in a recent press gaggle.

The judge had ordered injunctions blocking the administration from mobilizing the national guard, initially in the state then in California. The president has been pushing to send soldiers into Portland, which the president has described as “war-ravaged” based on small, non-violent protests outside the city's homeland security facility.

Record of Attacking Judges

Miller, Bondi, and Musk have a history of criticizing judges who have ruled against presidential directives or otherwise hindered the administration's policy goals. Before returning to power this year, Trump directed his followers against judges presiding over his civil and criminal trials, who were then deluged with intimidation and abuse.

Watchdog organizations, police departments, and the justices have highlighted a increased atmosphere of risks and intimidation in the period since he returned to the presidency.

Rising Threat Statistics

According to information collected by the federal agency, in the current year through the third quarter, there were over five hundred incidents to 395 federal judges, giving rise to more than eight hundred investigations. 2025 has already eclipsed the first recorded year, and last year, and is on track to top 2023's record of over six hundred threats.

The dangers are not just happening at the national level. Information by Princeton's Bridging Divides Initiative indicates that there have been at least 59 cases of intimidation, harassment, surveillance, or physical attacks committed against judges on the local level in the current year.

Analyst Analysis on Threat Sources

Experts say that the intimidation are a result of the rhetoric coming from senior administration figures.

In May, the watchdog group published a detailed report claiming that “malicious and highly irresponsible statements from Trump administration members and supporters align with escalating violent posts on social media.” It recorded “a 54% increase in demands for impeachment and violent threats against judges across digital networks from the first two months 2025, the initial period of the president's term.”

Beirich, the co-founder of the organization, said: “The president's threats against judges have certainly driven online vitriol at judges and calls for ouster. Attacking the courts is another move in Trump’s advance towards authoritarianism.”

International Strongman Playbook

This progression towards authoritarianism has been well-trodden in recent years in several countries, including by Bukele.

In several years ago, immediately after commencing a new term despite legal bans, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the country’s top prosecutor and five judges on the constitutional court. The justices, who had provoked his ire by ruling against pandemic policies, made way for new appointees selected by the leader.

The move echoed the Hungarian leader's remodeling of Hungary’s court system in 2018; the Turkish president's judicial purges in 2019; and attempts at comparable actions in the Middle Eastern state and the European country.

Undermining Court Autonomy

Experts explain that the intimidation and verbal assaults 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 associate professor at the university who has researched authoritarian backsliding in free nations, said the White House had learned from the models set by authoritarians overseas.

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

Pointing to instances such as the advisor's relentless claims of nearly limitless presidential authority, she noted: “They directly criticize 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 discussion by emphasizing their argument that the executive has greater authority than this judicial branch, which is not how checks and balances work.”

Leonard said: “Justices' only protection is public trust in the authority of their capacity to make those decisions. 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 democracy.”

Intimidation Tactics

Kim Lane Scheppele, academic of sociology and international affairs at the Ivy League school, has documented the use of “authoritarian law” by the likes of the Hungarian and Putin, and has warned about rising dangers to judges in the US.

She pointed to a wave of so-called “pizza doxxings” recently, in which judges have received unwanted pizza deliveries with the customer listed as a name, the son of Justice Salas, who was killed at the judge’s home in several years ago by a assailant aiming at the judge.

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

“US justices are protected by the presidential protection and the Marshals Service. And those are both specialized law enforcement that are placed structurally inside the Department of Justice. And the former AG has been leading the criticism on federal judges.”

Government Goals

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