🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump rarely accepts advice, especially from international figures who frequently seek to flatter and admire the US president.

However, the Central American nation's authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele has followed a distinct approach by urging the Trump administration to follow his example in removing what he terms “dishonest judges.”

His appeal for the president to move against the American court system also garnered support from Maga figures, such as an X post by one-time supporter the billionaire, who has in the past amplified Bukele's calls to impeach US judges.

Growing Threats to Court Autonomy

Experts say that Bukele's latest remarks occur of unprecedented dangers to court autonomy and individual judges in the United States, and during a period where the Trump administration is employing comparable authoritarian tactics used by leaders in nations such as Turkey, the European state, India, and his native El Salvador to weaken democratic accountability.

Bukele's social media call last week was just the latest in a string of taunts and allegations he has made against the US's legal system, including a March claim that the US was “facing a court takeover,” and ridicule of a federal judge's order to stop removal operations sending accused illegal immigrants to his country's harsh correctional facilities.

Criticism on Oregon Justice

The Salvadoran's impeachment call was also issued during online criticism on the state's justice Judge Immergut by presidential advisor Stephen Miller, attorney general Pam Bondi, Musk, and Trump himself in a recent press gaggle.

The judge had issued restraining orders blocking the administration from mobilizing the national guard, initially in the state then in the West Coast state. The president has been pushing to send troops into the city, which the leader has characterized as “war-ravaged” based on small, non-violent demonstrations outside the city's federal building.

Record of Targeting Justices

Miller, Bondi, and Musk have a history of attacking judges who have blocked presidential directives or in other ways impeded the administration's policy goals. Prior to returning to power recently, the president urged his followers against judges presiding over his civil and criminal trials, who were then deluged with threats and harassment.

Watchdog organizations, police departments, and judges themselves have highlighted a heightened climate of risks and intimidation in the period since he re-entered the presidency.

Increasing Threat Statistics

According to data gathered by the US Marshals Service, in the current year through the end of September, there were 562 threats to 395 federal judges, leading to more than eight hundred inquiries. This year has already eclipsed 2022, and 2024, and is likely to exceed the previous year's high of 630 threats.

The dangers are not just happening at the federal level. Data from the university's Bridging Divides Initiative indicates that there have been at least fifty-nine cases of threats, harassment, stalking, or violence committed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Analyst Analysis on Threat Sources

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

In spring, the watchdog group published a comprehensive report claiming that “harmful and reckless statements from Trump administration members and supporters align with escalating violent posts on online platforms.” It recorded “a 54% increase in demands for impeachment and physical intimidation against judges across social media platforms from the first two months of this year, the initial period of the president's term.”

Beirich, the co-founder of the organization, said: “Trump’s threats against judges have definitely driven digital abuse at judges and demands for impeachment. Attacking the courts is another move in the administration's advance towards authoritarianism.”

Global Authoritarian Playbook

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

In 2021, right after commencing a new term in the face of legal bans, Bukele’s parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the nation's top prosecutor and several justices on the constitutional court. The justices, who had angered him by rejecting pandemic policies, were replaced by new appointees hand picked by Bukele.

The action mirrored the Hungarian leader's remodeling of the nation's judiciary several years back; the Turkish president's judicial purges in 2019; and attempts at similar moves in the Middle Eastern state and the European country.

Undermining Judicial Independence

Analysts say that the intimidation and rhetorical attacks in the US can be viewed as efforts to undermine judicial independence in a structure that offers no easy way for the executive to dismiss judges the administration disapproves of.

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

“The administration is looking around at these successes and failures. 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 assertions of broad executive power, she noted: “They openly 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 executive has greater authority than this other co-equal branch, which is not how separation powers work.”

Leonard said: “Justices' only protection is people’s belief in the authority of their ability to make those rulings. Personal intimidation on top of eroding institutional legitimacy may make judges hesitate about decisions that go against the sitting government, which is, of course, massively problematic for court oversight and for democracy.”

Coercion Methods

Kim Lane Scheppele, professor of sociology and international affairs at the Ivy League school, has written about the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of Orbán and Putin, and has warned about escalating threats to judges in the US.

She highlighted a series of so-called “harassment deliveries” this year, in which judges have received unsolicited food orders with the recipient listed as Daniel Anderl, the child of Justice Salas, who was murdered at the residence in 2020 by a gunman aiming at Salas.

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

“US justices are protected by the presidential protection and the Marshals Service. And those are both dedicated police units that are placed institutionally inside the federal agency. And Pam Bondi has been leading the criticism on justices.”

Government Goals

Regarding the government's aims, the expert said that “impeaching a federal judge is highly not going to happen because it’s very difficult to do. {Right now|Currently