🔗 Share this article

The US President is not typically known for counsel, particularly from international figures who often attempt to flatter and admire the US president.

However, the Central American nation's strongman president Nayib Bukele has followed a distinct strategy by urging the Trump administration to emulate his actions in impeaching so-called “corrupt judges.”

His appeal for Trump to take action against the American court system also received support from Trump allies, such as an social media message by one-time close Trump ally the billionaire, who has in the past boosted the Salvadoran's demands to impeach US judges.

Growing Risks to Court Autonomy

Analysts say that Bukele's latest intervention come at a time of unmatched threats to judicial independence and specific justices in the United States, and during a phase where the Trump administration is employing comparable strong-arm methods used by rulers in countries such as Türkiye, the European state, India, and his native the Central American country to weaken government oversight.

The president's social media call last week was just the latest in a string of provocations and claims he has made against the American judiciary, including a March assertion that the US was “experiencing a judicial coup,” and ridicule of a court's ruling to stop deportation flights transporting accused undocumented individuals to his country's harsh prison system.

Criticism on Oregon Justice

Bukele's impeachment call was also issued during social media criticism on the state's federal judge Judge Immergut by presidential advisor Stephen Miller, attorney general Bondi, Musk, and the president personally in a recent media briefing.

Immergut had ordered injunctions blocking the administration from deploying the military reserves, initially in Oregon then in the West Coast state. Trump has been pushing to send troops into Portland, which the president has described as “battle-scarred” based on limited, non-violent demonstrations outside the city's federal building.

Record of Attacking Justices

Miller, the former AG, and the entrepreneur have a history of criticizing judges who have ruled against presidential directives or in other ways impeded the administration's policy goals. Prior to resuming office this year, Trump urged his supporters against judges presiding over his legal cases, who were then inundated with intimidation and harassment.

Monitoring groups, law enforcement agencies, and judges themselves have highlighted a increased atmosphere of threats and intimidation in the period since he returned to the White House.

Rising Threat Statistics

Based on information gathered by the federal agency, in 2025 through the third quarter, there were over five hundred incidents to 395 federal judges, leading to 805 investigations. 2025 has already eclipsed the first recorded year, and last year, and is likely to exceed the previous year's high of 630 reported incidents.

The dangers are not just happening at the national level. Data from Princeton's Bridging Divides Initiative shows that there have been at least fifty-nine instances of threats, harassment, surveillance, or violence directed against judges on the state and municipal levels in 2025.

Analyst Insights on Threat Sources

Specialists say that the threats are a product of the language coming from top government officials.

In spring, the watchdog group published a detailed report alleging that “harmful and highly irresponsible statements from White House allies and supporters coincide with escalating aggressive posts on online platforms.” It recorded “a fifty-four percent rise in calls for impeachment and physical intimidation against judges across social media platforms from the first two months 2025, the first full month of Trump’s administration.”

Beirich, the co-founder of GPAHE, said: “Trump’s threats against judges have certainly fueled online vitriol at judges and calls for ouster. Attacking the judiciary is another move in Trump’s advance towards authoritarianism.”

International Strongman Tactics

This progression towards autocracy has been common in the past decade in several nations, such as by the Salvadoran.

In 2021, immediately after starting a second term in the face of constitutional prohibitions, Bukele’s parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the nation's top prosecutor and five judges on the constitutional court. The justices, who had angered him by rejecting coronavirus measures, were replaced by new appointees selected by Bukele.

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

Weakening Court Autonomy

Analysts say that the threats and rhetorical attacks in the US can be viewed as efforts to undermine court autonomy in a structure that offers no easy way for the president to remove judges the administration opposes.

Leonard, an associate professor at Illinois State University who has researched authoritarian backsliding in democracies, said the White House had learned from the models set by authoritarians abroad.

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

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

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

Leonard said: “Judges' only protection is people’s belief in the legitimacy of their capacity to make those decisions. Personal intimidation on top of eroding institutional legitimacy may make judges think twice about judgments that go against the sitting government, which is, of course, massively problematic for judicial review and for democracy.”

Intimidation Tactics

Scheppele, professor of sociology and global studies at Princeton University, has written about the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of the Hungarian 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 Daniel Anderl, the child of Judge Esther Salas, who was killed at the judge’s home in several years ago by a gunman targeting Salas.

“Everyone knows what it means. ‘We know where you live. You are a target,’” Scheppele said.

“Federal judges are guarded by the presidential protection and the Marshals Service. And these are dedicated law enforcement that are placed structurally inside the Department of Justice. And the former AG has been spearheading the attacks on federal judges.”

Government Goals

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