🔗 Share this article

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

But, the Central American nation's strongman president Nayib Bukele has followed a distinct strategy by calling on the White House to emulate his actions in removing so-called “corrupt judges.”

His appeal for the president to move against the American court system also received backing from Maga figures, such as an social media message by one-time supporter the billionaire, who has in the past amplified Bukele's demands to oust US judges.

Unprecedented Threats to Judicial Independence

Analysts note that Bukele's recent intervention come at a time of unprecedented dangers to court autonomy and individual judges in the United States, and during a phase where the Trump administration is employing comparable authoritarian methods used by leaders in nations such as Turkey, the European state, the Asian nation, and his native El Salvador to weaken democratic accountability.

The president's social media call recently was just the latest in a string of taunts and allegations he has leveled against the US's legal system, such as a spring assertion that the US was “experiencing a court takeover,” and ridicule of a federal judge's order to stop deportation flights sending accused undocumented individuals to his country's brutal correctional facilities.

Criticism on Oregon Justice

Bukele's demand for removal was also issued during social media criticism on the state's justice Karin Immergut by White House aide Stephen Miller, former AG Pam Bondi, Musk, and Trump himself in a recent media briefing.

Immergut had issued injunctions blocking the administration from deploying the military reserves, initially in Oregon then in California. Trump has been eager to dispatch soldiers into Portland, which the leader has characterized as “battle-scarred” based on small, non-violent demonstrations outside the city's homeland security facility.

History of Targeting Judges

Miller, Bondi, and Musk have a long record of attacking judges who have ruled against presidential directives or in other ways impeded the administration's policy goals. Prior to resuming office recently, Trump urged his supporters against judges presiding over his civil and criminal trials, who were then inundated with intimidation and harassment.

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 Risk Data

Based on information gathered by the federal agency, in the current year through the third quarter, there were 562 threats to nearly four hundred US justices, leading to 805 inquiries. 2025 has already surpassed 2022, and 2024, and is on track to top 2023's high of over six hundred threats.

The dangers are not just happening at the national level. Data from Princeton's research project indicates that there have been at least fifty-nine instances of intimidation, harassment, stalking, or physical attacks committed against judges on the local level in 2025.

Analyst Analysis on Threat Sources

Experts say that the intimidation are a product of the language coming from senior administration figures.

In spring, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a comprehensive report claiming that “harmful and highly irresponsible statements from Trump administration members and allies align with rising violent posts on online platforms.” It noted “a fifty-four percent increase in demands for impeachment and physical intimidation against judges across digital networks from January to February 2025, the initial period of Trump’s administration.”

Heidi Beirich, the co-founder of the organization, said: “The president's threats against judges have certainly driven digital abuse at judges and calls for impeachment. Targeting the judiciary is one more step in the administration's advance towards authoritarianism.”

Global Strongman Playbook

This progression towards autocracy has been common in recent years 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 remove the country’s top prosecutor and five judges on the supreme court. The judges, who had angered him by rejecting pandemic policies, made way for new appointees selected by Bukele.

The action mirrored the Hungarian leader's overhaul of the nation's judiciary in 2018; Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s court cleanups recently; and attempts at similar moves in Israel and the European country.

Weakening Court Autonomy

Analysts say that the intimidation and verbal assaults in the US can be seen as attempts to weaken judicial independence in a system that provides no simple method for the president to remove judges the administration disapproves of.

Meghan Leonard, an associate professor at Illinois State University who has studied authoritarian backsliding in free nations, said the White House had learned from the examples set by strongmen overseas.

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

Pointing to instances such as the advisor's relentless claims of broad presidential authority, she noted: “They directly attack the judiciary by repeating repeatedly that it is not a equal branch in the separation of powers.

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

The professor said: “Justices' 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 current administration, which is, of course, highly concerning for court oversight and for the political system.”

Intimidation Tactics

Scheppele, academic of sociology and international affairs at Princeton University, has documented the use of “autocratic legalism” by the such as Orbán and the Russian, and has warned about rising threats to judges in the US.

She pointed to a series of so-called “harassment deliveries” recently, in which judges have received unwanted food orders with the recipient listed as Daniel Anderl, the son of Judge Esther Salas, who was murdered at the residence in 2020 by a gunman targeting the judge.

“Everyone knows what it means. ‘Your address is known. We’re coming for you,’” the professor said.

“US justices are protected by the presidential protection and the Marshals Service. And those are both dedicated law enforcement that sit institutionally inside the federal agency. And the former AG has been leading the criticism on federal judges.”

Administration Aims

On the government's objectives, the expert said that “removing a federal judge is almost certainly not going to happen because it’s so hard to do. {Right now|Currently