Maga Figures Endorse Bukele's Call for Trump to Target US Judiciary

Donald Trump is not typically known for counsel, particularly from international figures who frequently attempt to praise and admire the American leader.

However, the Central American nation's authoritarian leader Nayib Bukele has adopted a different approach by urging the Trump administration to follow his example in impeaching so-called “corrupt judges.”

His appeal for the president to move against the American court system also garnered backing from Maga figures, such as an X post by one-time close Trump ally Elon Musk, who has in the past boosted the Salvadoran's calls to impeach US judges.

Growing Risks to Judicial Independence

Analysts note that Bukele's recent remarks occur of unmatched threats to court autonomy and individual judges in the US, and during a phase where the Trump administration is using comparable authoritarian methods employed by rulers in countries such as Türkiye, the European state, the Asian nation, and his native El Salvador to weaken government oversight.

The president's social media statement last week was one more in a long series of taunts and claims he has leveled against the American judiciary, including a March assertion that the US was “facing a judicial coup,” and ridicule of a federal judge's order to stop removal operations sending accused illegal immigrants to his country's brutal prison system.

Criticism on Oregon Justice

The Salvadoran's impeachment call was also issued amid online criticism on Oregon justice Judge Immergut by presidential advisor Stephen Miller, attorney general Bondi, Musk, and the president himself in a latest press gaggle.

Immergut had ordered injunctions blocking the administration from deploying the national guard, initially in Oregon then in California. The president has been pushing to send troops into the city, which the leader has characterized as “battle-scarred” based on limited, non-violent protests outside the urban homeland security facility.

History of Targeting Justices

Miller, the former AG, and Musk have a long record of attacking judges who have ruled against presidential directives or in other ways hindered the administration's policy goals. Prior to resuming office recently, the president urged his followers against judges overseeing his civil and criminal trials, who were then deluged with threats and abuse.

Watchdog organizations, police departments, and the justices have pointed to a heightened atmosphere of threats and intimidation in the months since he returned to the White House.

Rising Threat Statistics

Based on data collected by the US Marshals Service, in the current year through the end of September, there were 562 incidents to nearly four hundred federal judges, leading to more than eight hundred investigations. 2025 has already eclipsed 2022, and 2024, and is likely to exceed 2023's record of 630 reported incidents.

The dangers are not just happening at the national level. Information by Princeton's Bridging Divides Initiative shows that there have been at least fifty-nine instances of threats, harassment, surveillance, or physical attacks directed against judges on the state and municipal levels in the current year.

Expert Insights on Threat Sources

Experts state that the intimidation are a product of the language coming from top government officials.

In May, the watchdog group published a comprehensive report alleging that “malicious and reckless statements from White House allies and supporters align with rising violent posts on social media.” It noted “a 54% increase in demands for impeachment and physical intimidation against judges across digital networks from the first two months of this year, the initial period of Trump’s administration.”

Beirich, the co-founder of the organization, said: “Trump’s threats against judges have definitely fueled online vitriol at judges and calls for ouster. Targeting the courts is one more step in the administration's march towards authoritarianism.”

Global Strongman Tactics

That march towards autocracy has been common in the past decade in several nations, such as by the Salvadoran.

In 2021, right after commencing a second term despite constitutional prohibitions, Bukele’s allies in congress voted to remove the nation's attorney general and several judges on the constitutional court. The judges, who had angered him by ruling against coronavirus measures, made way for replacements selected by Bukele.

The action mirrored Viktor Orbán’s overhaul of the nation's judiciary several years back; the Turkish president's court cleanups in 2019; and efforts at similar moves in the Middle Eastern state and the European country.

Undermining Court Autonomy

Analysts say that the intimidation and verbal assaults in the US can be seen as attempts to undermine judicial independence in a system that offers no easy way for the president to remove judges Trump opposes.

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

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

Pointing to examples such as Miller’s persistent assertions of nearly limitless presidential authority, she added: “They directly criticize the courts by repeating over and over that it is not a equal branch in the government structure.

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

The professor said: “Justices' sole safeguard is people’s belief in the authority of their ability to make those decisions. 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 the political system.”

Intimidation Tactics

Scheppele, professor of social science and global studies at Princeton University, has documented the use of “autocratic legalism” by the likes of Orbán and the Russian, and has spoken out about rising dangers to judges in the US.

She highlighted a series of termed “harassment deliveries” this year, in which judges have received unsolicited food orders with the recipient listed as Daniel Anderl, the son of Justice Salas, who was murdered at the judge’s home in 2020 by a assailant targeting the judge.

“Everyone knows what it means. ‘Your address is known. You are a target,’” the professor said.

“Federal judges are protected by the presidential protection and the Marshals Service. And these are specialized law enforcement that sit institutionally inside the Department of Justice. And Pam Bondi has been leading the criticism on justices.”

Administration Aims

On the government's aims, the expert said that “removing a US justice is highly not going to happen because it’s very difficult to do. {Right now|Currently