🔗 Share this article

The US President does not usually take counsel, particularly from international figures who often attempt to praise and admire the American leader.

But, the Central American nation's authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele has adopted a different strategy by calling on the Trump administration to emulate his actions in impeaching so-called “corrupt judges.”

The call for the president to move against the American court system also garnered support from Trump allies, including an social media message by one-time supporter the billionaire, who has previously amplified Bukele's demands to impeach US judges.

Growing Risks to Judicial Independence

Analysts note that Bukele's latest intervention come at a time of unmatched dangers to judicial independence and specific justices in the United States, and during a period where the Trump administration is using similar authoritarian methods used by rulers in countries such as Türkiye, the European state, the Asian nation, and Bukele's own the Central American country to weaken democratic accountability.

Bukele's online call last week was just the latest in a long series of provocations and allegations he has leveled against the US's legal system, including a spring assertion that the US was “facing a court takeover,” and his mockery of a federal judge's ruling to stop removal operations transporting suspected illegal immigrants to his country's harsh correctional facilities.

Attacks on Federal Judge

The Salvadoran's demand for removal was also made during social media attacks on the state's justice Karin 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, first in Oregon then in the West Coast state. The president has been eager to send troops into Portland, which the president has described as “war-ravaged” based on limited, non-violent demonstrations outside the urban homeland security facility.

History of Targeting Judges

The advisor, Bondi, and the entrepreneur have a history of attacking judges who have ruled against presidential directives or in other ways impeded the administration's political agenda. Before returning to power recently, the president urged his supporters against judges presiding over his legal cases, who were then inundated with threats and harassment.

Watchdog organizations, law enforcement agencies, and judges themselves have pointed to a heightened atmosphere of threats and intimidation in the months since he returned to the presidency.

Increasing Threat Statistics

According to data collected by the federal agency, in 2025 through the end of September, there were over five hundred incidents to nearly four hundred US justices, giving rise to 805 inquiries. 2025 has already surpassed the first recorded year, and 2024, and is on track to exceed 2023's record of 630 threats.

The threats are not just happening at the federal level. Data from the university's Bridging Divides Initiative indicates that there have been at least 59 instances of intimidation, harassment, stalking, or physical attacks directed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Analyst Analysis on Threat Sources

Specialists state that the threats 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 claiming that “harmful and reckless statements from Trump administration members and allies coincide with rising violent posts on social media.” It recorded “a fifty-four percent increase in calls for impeachment and physical intimidation against judges across social media platforms from the first two months 2025, the initial period of Trump’s administration.”

Heidi Beirich, the founder of the organization, said: “The president's warnings against judges have certainly fueled online vitriol at judges and calls for ouster. Targeting the judiciary is another move in Trump’s advance towards authoritarianism.”

Global Strongman Tactics

This progression towards authoritarianism has been common in recent years in several nations, such as by the Salvadoran.

In 2021, right after starting a second term despite constitutional prohibitions, the president's allies in congress voted to dismiss the nation's attorney general and five justices on the supreme court. The justices, who had provoked his ire by ruling against coronavirus measures, made way for new appointees hand picked by the leader.

The move echoed the Hungarian leader's remodeling of Hungary’s court system several years back; Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s judicial purges recently; and attempts at comparable actions in Israel and Poland.

Undermining Judicial Independence

Analysts say that the threats 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 remove judges the administration opposes.

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

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

Citing examples such as the advisor's relentless claims of broad executive power, she added: “They directly attack the judiciary by stating repeatedly that it is not a co-equal branch in the government structure.

“They persist in reframe the debate by repeating their claim that the president has greater authority than this judicial branch, which is not how separation powers work.”

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

Coercion Methods

Kim Lane Scheppele, professor of sociology and international affairs at Princeton University, has written about 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 highlighted a wave of so-called “harassment deliveries” this year, in which judges have received unwanted food orders with the customer listed as a name, the son of Justice Salas, who was murdered at the judge’s home in several years ago by a gunman targeting the judge.

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

“US justices are protected by the presidential protection and the federal police. And these are dedicated police units that are placed structurally inside the federal agency. And Pam Bondi has been spearheading the criticism on federal judges.”

Administration Aims

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