Trump Supporters Back El Salvador Leader's Plea for US President to Crack Down on American Judiciary

The US President is not typically known for guidance, particularly from international figures who frequently attempt to praise and compliment the US president.

However, the Central American nation's authoritarian leader Bukele has adopted a different strategy by calling on the Trump administration to emulate his actions in removing what he terms “dishonest judges.”

The call for Trump to take action against the American court system also received support from Maga figures, such as an social media message by former close Trump ally Elon Musk, who has previously boosted Bukele's calls to impeach US judges.

Growing Risks to Court Autonomy

Analysts note that Bukele's latest intervention come at a time of unprecedented dangers to court autonomy and specific justices in the US, and during a period where the Trump administration is employing similar authoritarian tactics employed by leaders in countries such as Türkiye, Hungary, India, and his native the Central American country to weaken democratic accountability.

The president's online statement last week was one more in a string of taunts and allegations he has made against the American judiciary, such as a March assertion that the US was “experiencing a judicial coup,” and ridicule of a court's ruling to stop removal operations transporting accused illegal immigrants to his country's harsh correctional facilities.

Criticism on Federal Judge

Bukele's demand for removal was also issued amid online criticism on the state's justice Karin Immergut by presidential advisor Stephen Miller, attorney general Pam Bondi, Elon Musk, and the president himself in a latest press gaggle.

Immergut had ordered restraining orders blocking the administration from mobilizing the national guard, first in Oregon then in California. Trump has been pushing to send soldiers into Portland, which the leader has described as “war-ravaged” based on limited, non-violent protests outside the city's homeland security facility.

Record of Attacking Justices

Miller, the former AG, and the entrepreneur have a history of criticizing judges who have blocked presidential directives or otherwise hindered the administration's political agenda. Prior to returning to power recently, Trump directed his followers against judges presiding over his civil and criminal trials, who were then deluged with threats and abuse.

Watchdog organizations, police departments, and the justices have highlighted a heightened climate of risks and coercion in the months since he re-entered the White House.

Increasing Threat Statistics

Based on information collected by the US Marshals Service, in the current year through the third quarter, there were over five hundred threats to nearly four hundred federal judges, leading to 805 investigations. 2025 has already eclipsed the first recorded year, and last year, and is likely to top 2023's record of 630 threats.

The dangers are not only happening at the national level. Data from Princeton's research project shows that there have been at least fifty-nine instances of intimidation, harassment, surveillance, or violence committed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Analyst Insights on Threat Sources

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

In spring, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) published a comprehensive report claiming that “harmful and reckless statements from Trump administration members and allies align with rising aggressive posts on social media.” It noted “a fifty-four percent increase in calls for removal and physical intimidation against judges across digital networks from January to February 2025, the first full month of the president's term.”

Beirich, the co-founder of the organization, said: “Trump’s warnings against judges have certainly fueled digital abuse at judges and calls for impeachment. Attacking the courts is one more step in the administration's march towards strongman rule.”

International Authoritarian Tactics

That march towards authoritarianism has been common in recent years in multiple countries, including by the Salvadoran.

In 2021, immediately after starting a second term in the face of constitutional prohibitions, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to dismiss the country’s attorney general and several judges on the constitutional court. The justices, who had angered him by ruling against coronavirus measures, made way for replacements selected by Bukele.

The action echoed the Hungarian leader's overhaul of the nation's judiciary several years back; the Turkish president's judicial purges in 2019; and attempts at comparable actions in Israel and the European country.

Undermining Judicial Independence

Analysts explain that the threats and rhetorical attacks in the US can be viewed as efforts to weaken court autonomy in a system that provides no simple method for the president to dismiss judges Trump opposes.

Leonard, an associate professor at Illinois State University who has studied democratic decline in free nations, said the White House had taken cues from the examples set by authoritarians abroad.

“The government 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 judiciary,” she said.

Citing examples such as the advisor's relentless claims of nearly limitless presidential authority, she noted: “They directly attack the courts by repeating repeatedly 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 more power than this judicial branch, which is not how separation powers work.”

The professor 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 current administration, which is, of course, massively problematic for court oversight and for the political system.”

Intimidation Tactics

Kim Lane Scheppele, academic of social science and global studies at the Ivy League school, has written about the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of Orbán and Putin, and has spoken out about escalating threats to judges in the US.

She highlighted a wave of termed “harassment deliveries” recently, in which judges have received unsolicited pizza deliveries with the recipient listed as a name, the child of Judge Esther Salas, who was killed at the residence in 2020 by a gunman targeting the judge.

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

“US justices are protected by the presidential protection and the Marshals Service. And those are both specialized law enforcement that are placed structurally inside the Department of Justice. And the former AG has been spearheading the criticism on justices.”

Administration Aims

On the administration’s objectives, Scheppele said that “removing a federal judge is almost certainly not going to happen because it’s very difficult to do. {Right now|Currently