🔗 Share this article

The US President does not usually take guidance, especially from international figures who often seek to praise and admire the American leader.

But, El Salvador's authoritarian leader Bukele has adopted a distinct strategy by calling on the White House to follow his example in removing so-called “dishonest judges.”

The call for the president to take action against the US judiciary also garnered backing from Maga figures, including an social media message by former supporter Elon Musk, who has in the past boosted Bukele's calls to oust US judges.

Growing Risks to Judicial Independence

Experts note that Bukele's latest remarks occur of unmatched threats to court autonomy and specific justices in the US, and during a phase where the president's team is using similar authoritarian methods used by rulers in countries such as Turkey, the European state, the Asian nation, and Bukele's own El Salvador to weaken government oversight.

Bukele's social media statement last week was one more in a long series of taunts and claims he has made against the American judiciary, such as a March claim that the US was “facing a judicial coup,” and his mockery of a federal judge's ruling to stop removal operations transporting suspected undocumented individuals to his country's harsh correctional facilities.

Attacks on Oregon Justice

The Salvadoran's demand for removal was also made amid social media criticism on Oregon federal judge Karin Immergut by presidential advisor Miller, attorney general Pam Bondi, Elon Musk, and the president personally in a recent press gaggle.

The judge had issued injunctions blocking the administration from mobilizing the military reserves, first in the state then in the West Coast state. The president has been eager to send soldiers into Portland, which the leader has characterized as “war-ravaged” based on limited, non-violent demonstrations outside the city's homeland security facility.

History of Targeting Judges

Miller, the former AG, and Musk have a long record of criticizing judges who have ruled against presidential directives or otherwise hindered the government's policy goals. Prior to returning to power recently, Trump urged his followers against judges overseeing his civil and criminal trials, who were then deluged with threats and harassment.

Monitoring groups, law enforcement agencies, and judges themselves have highlighted a increased atmosphere of risks and intimidation in the months since he re-entered the White House.

Rising Risk Data

Based on information collected by the federal agency, in 2025 through the third quarter, there were 562 incidents to nearly four hundred US justices, giving rise to more than eight hundred investigations. 2025 has already eclipsed the first recorded year, and 2024, and is on track to exceed the previous year's high of over six hundred threats.

The threats are not just happening at the national level. Information by Princeton's Bridging Divides Initiative shows that there have been at least 59 instances of threats, harassment, stalking, or violence committed against judges on the local level in 2025.

Analyst Analysis on Root Causes

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

In May, the watchdog group published a detailed report claiming that “harmful and highly irresponsible statements from Trump administration members and supporters coincide with escalating aggressive posts on social media.” It noted “a fifty-four percent increase in calls for impeachment and violent threats against judges across social media platforms from January to February of this year, the first full month of Trump’s administration.”

Heidi Beirich, the co-founder of the organization, said: “Trump’s warnings against judges have certainly fueled online vitriol at judges and demands for impeachment. Attacking the judiciary is another move in the administration's march towards strongman rule.”

International Authoritarian Playbook

This progression towards authoritarianism has been common in the past decade in several nations, including by the Salvadoran.

In several years ago, right after commencing a new term in the face of constitutional prohibitions, the president's allies in congress voted to remove the nation's attorney general and five judges on the supreme court. The judges, who had provoked his ire by ruling against pandemic policies, made way for new appointees hand picked by the leader.

The action mirrored the Hungarian leader's remodeling of the nation's judiciary in 2018; the Turkish president's court cleanups recently; and efforts at comparable actions in Israel and Poland.

Weakening Judicial Independence

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

Meghan Leonard, an associate professor at the university who has researched authoritarian backsliding in free nations, said the White House had taken cues from the models set by strongmen abroad.

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

Pointing to instances such as Miller’s relentless assertions of nearly limitless presidential authority, she noted: “They directly criticize the courts by stating over and over that it is not a co-equal branch in the government structure.

“They continue to redefine the debate by emphasizing their argument that the president has greater authority than this other co-equal branch, which is not how separation powers work.”

Leonard said: “Judges' sole safeguard is people’s belief in the legitimacy of their capacity to make those rulings. Individual threats on top of eroding institutional legitimacy may make judges think twice about decisions that go against the current administration, which is, of course, massively problematic for judicial review and for democracy.”

Intimidation Tactics

Scheppele, academic of social science and international affairs at Princeton University, has written about the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of the Hungarian and Putin, and has warned about rising dangers to judges in the US.

She highlighted a series of termed “harassment deliveries” recently, in which judges have received unsolicited pizza deliveries with the customer listed as Daniel Anderl, 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. ‘Your address is known. We’re coming for you,’” Scheppele said.

“Federal judges are guarded by the presidential protection and the federal police. And these are dedicated law enforcement that are placed structurally inside the Department of Justice. And Pam Bondi has been spearheading the criticism on federal judges.”

Administration Aims

Regarding 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