Maga Figures Endorse El Salvador Leader's Call for Trump to Target American Judiciary

Donald Trump is not typically known for counsel, especially from foreign leaders who frequently seek to praise and compliment the US president.

But, the Central American nation's authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele has followed a distinct strategy by calling on the White House to follow his example in removing what he terms “corrupt judges.”

The call for the president to move against the US judiciary also received backing from Trump allies, such as an social media message by one-time close Trump ally the billionaire, who has in the past amplified the Salvadoran's demands to impeach US judges.

Growing Risks to Court Autonomy

Analysts say that Bukele's latest remarks occur of unmatched dangers to court autonomy and specific justices in the United States, and during a period where the president's team is using comparable strong-arm tactics employed by leaders in nations such as Türkiye, the European state, the Asian nation, and Bukele's own El Salvador to undermine democratic accountability.

The president's online statement last week was one more in a string of taunts and claims he has made against the US's legal system, including a March assertion that the US was “experiencing a judicial coup,” and his mockery of a federal judge's ruling to stop removal operations sending accused illegal immigrants to his nation's harsh prison system.

Attacks on Oregon Justice

The Salvadoran's demand for removal was also made amid online criticism on the state's federal judge Judge Immergut by presidential advisor Stephen Miller, former AG Pam Bondi, Musk, and the president himself in a latest press gaggle.

The judge had issued injunctions preventing the administration from mobilizing the military reserves, initially in the state then in California. The president has been pushing to send soldiers into Portland, which the leader has described as “war-ravaged” based on small, non-violent demonstrations outside the urban homeland security facility.

History of Attacking Justices

The advisor, Bondi, and Musk have a long record of criticizing judges who have ruled against Trump's executive orders or otherwise hindered the government's policy goals. Before returning to power this year, Trump directed his supporters against judges presiding over his civil and criminal trials, who were then inundated with intimidation and harassment.

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

Rising Threat Statistics

Based on data collected by the federal agency, in 2025 through the end of September, there were 562 incidents to nearly four hundred federal judges, leading to 805 inquiries. 2025 has already surpassed the first recorded year, and 2024, and is likely to exceed 2023's high of over six hundred reported incidents.

The dangers are not only happening at the federal level. Data from Princeton's research project indicates that there have been at least fifty-nine instances of intimidation, targeting, stalking, or physical attacks directed against judges on the local level in 2025.

Analyst Insights on Root Causes

Experts say that the intimidation are a result of the language coming from top government officials.

In May, the watchdog group published a comprehensive report claiming that “harmful and highly irresponsible statements from Trump administration members and supporters align with rising violent posts on online platforms.” It recorded “a 54% increase in calls for removal and violent threats against judges across social media platforms from January to February 2025, the initial period of the president's term.”

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

Global Authoritarian Tactics

This progression towards authoritarianism has been well-trodden in recent years in multiple countries, including by the Salvadoran.

In several years ago, right after commencing a second term despite constitutional prohibitions, the president's parliamentary loyalists voted to remove the nation's top prosecutor and five justices on the supreme court. The justices, who had provoked his ire by ruling against coronavirus measures, were replaced by new appointees hand picked by Bukele.

The action mirrored Viktor Orbán’s remodeling of Hungary’s court system in 2018; the Turkish president's court cleanups in 2019; and attempts at similar moves in the Middle Eastern state and Poland.

Weakening Court Autonomy

Analysts say that the intimidation and rhetorical attacks in the US can be viewed as efforts to undermine judicial independence in a structure that provides no simple method for the president to dismiss judges the administration disapproves of.

Leonard, an academic at Illinois State University who has researched democratic decline in free nations, said the Trump administration had learned from the examples set by strongmen overseas.

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

Pointing to examples such as the advisor's persistent claims of broad executive power, she noted: “They openly criticize the courts by repeating repeatedly that it is not a equal branch in the government structure.

“They continue to reframe the debate by emphasizing their argument that the president has greater authority than this judicial branch, which is not how checks and balances work.”

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

Intimidation Tactics

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

She highlighted a series of termed “pizza doxxings” recently, in which judges have received unsolicited food orders with the recipient listed as a name, the child of Justice Salas, who was killed at the judge’s home in 2020 by a gunman targeting the judge.

“Everyone knows what it means. ‘Your address is known. We’re coming for you,’” the professor said.

“US justices are protected by the Secret Service and the Marshals Service. And those are both dedicated law enforcement that are placed structurally inside the Department of Justice. And the former AG has been leading the attacks on justices.”

Administration Aims

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