Donald Trump and Elon Musk have been expanding their extreme attacks on US judges who have blocked some of Trump’s executive orders and Musk’s cuts to federal agencies, receiving backing from high-ranking House Republicans and other politicians, including those who have received significant campaign contributions from Musk, the world’s wealthiest person.

House Speaker Mike Johnson and Chair of the Judiciary Panel Jim Jordan have echoed some of Trump’s attacks on judges, with an April 1 subcommittee hearing exploring “judicial overreach” and methods to limit judges who have hindered Trump’s directives or Musk’s “department of government efficiency” (Doge) and its severe cuts to the federal government.

Republican consultants with extensive experience believe that Musk’s considerable financial backing for campaigns, which amounted to approximately $300m in support of Trump’s 2022 election victory, is likely to bolster numerous Republican candidates in the 2024 elections, increasing the pressure on members to quicken efforts to rein in dissenting judges.

“Capitol Hill Republicans are expecting Musk to generously donate to them in the 2024 elections,” remarked veteran Republican strategist Charlie Black. “However, such contributions are likely to be aligned with the preferences of the president.”

Verbal attacks on judges by Trump and his allies have intensified due to adverse rulings regarding several of Trump’s executive orders, including key court decisions in March that attempted to halt the deportation of Venezuelan immigrants and penalize law firms that Trump viewed as political foes.

Judge James Boasberg saw his impartiality questioned by Trump after issuing a ruling to prevent the deportation of hundreds of Venezuelans to an El Salvador prison. This prompted Trump to falsely label him a “radical left-wing lunatic,” call for his impeachment, and demand his disbarment.

Musk has consistently used his social media platform X, where he has over 200 million followers, to advocate for the impeachment of judges whose rulings he disagrees with, stating on February 25 that the only way to restore “rule of the people in America” is by impeaching judges.

Legal scholars contend that Trump and Musk’s radical threats of impeachment or disbarment for judicial decisions that halt or block administrative actions erode the rule of law.

“Trump and Musk are playing with fire,” said Nancy Gertner, a retired Massachusetts judge and lecturer at Harvard Law School. “They are undermining foundational constitutional principles.”

Chief Justice John Roberts of the Supreme Court strongly reprimanded Trump’s call for Boasberg’s impeachment, stating that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreements with judicial decisions.

Moreover, contrary to Trump’s unfounded accusations, Boasberg’s rulings have not been one-sided; for example, he supported Trump in 2017 regarding the IRS’s sharing of his tax returns, as requested by a long-shot lawsuit.

Last month, three other Washington DC judges ruled against Trump’s executive orders targeting law firms he considered political adversaries for retaliation, concluding that these orders were based on questionable legal grounds.

In an effort to increase pressure on judges, Trump’s allies have explored other avenues to limit judicial power after Judge Beryl Howell temporarily blocked Trump from penalizing the law firm Perkins Coie; the Justice Department attempted to remove Howell from the case due to alleged bias.

Legal experts and former judges are expressing concern over the threats to the rule of law and the safety of judges sparked by the attacks from Trump and his political allies.

“While calls to impeach federal judges based on their decisions are largely performative, they are also designed to disrespect the judiciary and the rule of law,” said John Jones, a former federal judge and current president of Dickinson College.

Furthermore, many of these calls for impeachment are accompanied by the irresponsible release of personal information about judges, which endangers their personal safety and that of their families.

“The real risk doesn’t stem from Congress but from the extreme elements within Trump’s camp, who might be provoked to threaten or actually harm targeted judges,” said Daniel Richman, a former federal prosecutor and professor at Columbia Law School.

A majority of Trump’s staunch supporters in Congress are joining his assault on judges, encouraged by Musk’s campaign contributions.

At least seven Republican members of Congress, including Andy Ogles of Tennessee and Brandon Gill of Texas, echoed Trump’s call for Judge Boasberg’s impeachment or advocated other actions against judges who ruled against Trump orders, and each received a $6,600 donation from Musk, the maximum allowable donation.

Although Republican leaders suggest that impeaching judges is improbable due to a lack of votes, their efforts to support Trump’s crusade against judicial independence are intensifying, with debates about banning nationwide injunctions by judges underway.

House Speaker Johnson pledged on March 25th that “desperate times call for desperate measures, and Congress will take action,” suggesting legislation to ban nationwide injunctions might be introduced soon.

As a leader of his chamber’s judiciary committee and a recipient of a Musk donation, Senator Charles Grassley held a hearing that also explored the prohibition of nationwide injunctions; Grassley introduced legislation in March to end the “practice of universal injunctions,” but its passage in the Senate is considered unlikely.

Some former Republican lawmakers criticize Trump’s congressional allies for amplifying his attacks on judges and anticipate that House Republicans will seek to leverage Trump’s anger towards judges for fundraising purposes.

“The impeachment calls and investigations into judges by members like Jordan, Gill, and Ogles are examples of blind loyalty to Trump and sycophancy,” said Dave Trott, a former Michigan representative. “Their actions are contributing to a constitutional crisis they have sworn to uphold.”

“And just in case these sycophants choose to confront Trump, Elon is using his billions to assure Republicans remain in office. This concentration of wealth and power is a grave concern for our country,” Trott added.

Other former lawmakers echo similar warnings.

“I think this is a talking point and a fundraising strategy,” said Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania, noting that members will attack judges for impeding Trump’s agenda and will use that for campaign fundraising purposes.”

Some former prosecutors are concerned that the judicial attacks by Trump and his Republican allies complement his broader effort to consolidate power.

“Trump has, believe it or not, a strategic plan to neutralize all opposition,” said Paul Rosenzweig, a former prosecutor. “Part of this plan involves silencing internal oversight and intimidating external opposition, through threats against law firms. The ultimate goal is to eliminate the final independent check on his authority – the judges – by falsely accusing them of being partial and enlisting his sycophantic supporters to aid in his efforts.”