🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump rarely accepts advice, especially from international figures who often seek to praise and compliment the US president.

However, El Salvador's authoritarian leader Bukele has followed a distinct approach by urging the White House to emulate his actions in removing what he terms “dishonest judges.”

His appeal for Trump to move against the American court system also garnered support from Trump allies, including an X post by one-time supporter Elon Musk, who has in the past boosted Bukele's demands to oust US judges.

Growing Threats to Judicial Independence

Analysts say that Bukele's recent remarks come at a time of unmatched dangers to judicial independence and individual judges in the United States, and during a period where the president's team is using similar strong-arm methods employed by leaders in countries such as Türkiye, the European state, India, and Bukele's own El Salvador to undermine democratic accountability.

Bukele's social media call last week was one more in a string of provocations and allegations he has made against the American judiciary, including a spring claim that the US was “experiencing a judicial coup,” and ridicule of a federal judge's ruling to halt deportation flights sending accused illegal immigrants to his nation's harsh correctional facilities.

Criticism on Oregon Justice

Bukele's demand for removal was also made amid online criticism on Oregon federal judge Judge Immergut by presidential advisor Stephen Miller, former AG Pam Bondi, Elon Musk, and the president himself in a recent media briefing.

Immergut had ordered injunctions blocking the administration from mobilizing the national guard, first in Oregon then in the West Coast state. Trump has been pushing to dispatch troops into Portland, which the leader has characterized as “battle-scarred” based on small, non-violent demonstrations outside the urban homeland security facility.

History of Attacking Judges

Miller, the former AG, and the entrepreneur have a long record of attacking judges who have blocked Trump's executive orders or in other ways impeded the government's political agenda. Before resuming office this year, Trump directed his followers against judges overseeing his legal cases, who were then deluged with intimidation and abuse.

Monitoring groups, police departments, and the justices have pointed to a increased climate of risks and coercion in the months since he re-entered the White House.

Rising Risk Data

Based on data collected by the US Marshals Service, in the current year through the end of September, there were 562 threats to nearly four hundred federal judges, giving rise to more than eight hundred inquiries. This year has already surpassed 2022, and 2024, and is likely to exceed 2023's high of over six hundred reported incidents.

The threats are not only happening at the federal level. Information by the university's Bridging Divides Initiative shows that there have been at least 59 cases of intimidation, targeting, stalking, or physical attacks directed against judges on the local level in the current year.

Expert Insights on Root Causes

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

In May, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a detailed report claiming that “malicious and highly irresponsible statements from Trump administration members and supporters align with escalating aggressive posts on online platforms.” It recorded “a fifty-four percent increase in calls for removal and physical intimidation against judges across social media platforms from January to February of this year, the first full month of Trump’s administration.”

Heidi Beirich, the founder of GPAHE, said: “Trump’s threats against judges have definitely driven online vitriol at judges and demands for impeachment. Targeting the courts is another move in Trump’s advance towards authoritarianism.”

Global Strongman Playbook

That march towards authoritarianism has been well-trodden in the past decade in several nations, including by the Salvadoran.

In several years ago, immediately after starting a second term despite legal bans, Bukele’s allies in congress voted to remove the country’s attorney general and several justices on the constitutional court. The justices, who had angered him by rejecting coronavirus measures, were replaced by replacements hand picked by the leader.

The move echoed Viktor Orbán’s remodeling of the nation's judiciary several years back; the Turkish president's court cleanups recently; and efforts at similar moves in Israel and Poland.

Undermining Judicial Independence

Experts say that the intimidation and rhetorical attacks in the US can be viewed as attempts to undermine judicial independence in a system that provides no simple method for the executive to dismiss judges Trump disapproves of.

Meghan Leonard, an academic at the university who has researched authoritarian backsliding in democracies, said the Trump administration had learned from the examples set by strongmen overseas.

“The government is looking around at these achievements and failures. They know they’re not going to be able to pass any legislation that would weaken the judiciary,” she said.

Pointing to examples such as the advisor's relentless assertions of nearly limitless executive power, she noted: “They openly attack the judiciary by repeating over and over that it is not a co-equal branch in the government structure.

“They continue to redefine the debate by repeating their claim that the executive has greater authority than this other co-equal branch, which is not how checks and balances work.”

Leonard said: “Judges' only protection is people’s belief in the authority of their ability to make those decisions. Individual threats on top of weakening institutional legitimacy may make judges think twice about decisions that go against the sitting government, which is, of course, highly concerning for court oversight and for democracy.”

Intimidation Tactics

Scheppele, professor of sociology and international affairs at Princeton University, has written about the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of the Hungarian and the Russian, and has warned about escalating dangers to judges in the US.

She highlighted a series of termed “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 killed at the residence in 2020 by a assailant targeting Salas.

“Everyone understands what it means. ‘Your address is known. You are a target,’” Scheppele said.

“US justices are protected by the presidential protection and the federal police. And these are dedicated law enforcement that are placed institutionally inside the Department of Justice. And Pam Bondi has been leading the criticism on justices.”

Administration Aims

On the administration’s objectives, Scheppele said that “impeaching a US justice is almost certainly not going to happen because it’s so hard to do. {Right now|Currently