&w=3840&q=100)
Supporters of Brazil's ex-President Jair Bolsonaro hold mass protest in Sao Paulo
Brazil's former President Jair Bolsonaro (C) leaves a rally on Paulista Avenue in Sao Paulo, Brazil, on June 29, 2025. AFP
Former president Jair Bolsonaro said Sunday he was prepared to 'change Brazil's destiny' as he addressed thousands of supporters in Sao Paulo, even while facing decades in prison for allegedly attempting a coup.
The divisive far-right figure called for the demonstration on a major thoroughfare of South America's largest metropolis, seeking 'justice' as he battles the charges.
'Those who accuse me may have many trump cards up their sleeves, but I have three things on my side that they don't have: God, freedom and the support of a large part of the Brazilian population,' Bolsonaro told the crowd, many of whom were clad in the green-and-yellow of the Brazilian flag.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The former president has called for several demonstrations since the start of the legal proceedings against him, and attendance has dwindled in recent months.
The University of Sao Paulo estimated about 12,400 people took part in Sunday's gathering on Paulista Avenue, a sharp drop from the 45,000 who took part in April and the 185,000 estimated to have marched for Bolsonaro in February.
The former army captain dreams of emulating Donald Trump's return to the White House, despite being banned from holding public office until 2030 over his attacks on Brazil's electronic voting system.
Bolsonaro nevertheless spoke of next year's general elections, placing particular emphasis on the legislative ones.
'Give me 50 percent of the deputies and senators, and I'll change Brazil's destiny,' boomed Bolsonaro, wearing a blue tracksuit as he addressed cheering supporters.
Unlike on previous occasions, the 70-year-old did not explicitly present himself as the conservative camp's candidate for the 2026 presidential elections.
'I'm not obsessed with power, I'm in love with my country,' he said.
'I don't need to be the president,' he added. 'If I remain honorary president of my party, we can do what you want.'
'Whatever he wants'
The demonstration follows a hectic several weeks for the embattled ex-leader.
During a key phase in his Supreme Court trial earlier this month, he denied involvement in an alleged coup plot to wrest back power after leftist Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva narrowly beat him at the ballot box in October 2022.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The prosecutor's office said the plot, which envisaged the assassination of Lula and other authorities, failed to materialize due to lack of support from the senior military command.
Bolsonaro has rejected any wrongdoing, and he did so again Sunday, claiming the cases are politically motivated to prevent him from making a comeback in the 2026 elections.
'They did the same thing with me as with Marine Le Pen,' he told AFP, referring to the French far-right leader who was convicted of embezzlement in March and barred from running in elections for five years.
On Sunday, Sao Paulo Governor Tarcisio de Freitas, tipped as a potential candidate to represent the conservatives in the 2026 presidential election, offered full-throated support for Bolsonaro, calling him 'the greatest leader in the history' of the country.
President Lula – whose popularity remains low – has yet to announce whether or not he will run for another term.
Valdemar Costa Neto, president of Bolsonaro's Liberal Party (PL), said it was time the party beefed up its political ground game.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
'Bolsonaro must be present at this type of demonstration to show the judiciary that the people are with him,' the leader said.
'As long as he's honorary president of the PL, we'll do whatever he wants, because the votes belong to him.'
Some bystanders were unimpressed by the pro-Bolsonaro protest.
'This guy, who wanted to blow up Brasilia and kill his political opponent, should go to prison,' said Dionisio Teixeira, a record seller on Paulista Avenue, which on Sundays is transformed into a pedestrian zone.
'I don't know how people can still come here to defend him.'
On January 8, 2023, thousands of Bolsonarists took over power centers in the Brazilian capital and demanded a military intervention to oust Lula from power one week after his inauguration.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Cambodia calls for ceasefire: Thailand border fighting to stop: UN envoy
Photos from the aftermath of fighting along the Thailand-Cambodia border (AP photo) Cambodia has called for an immediate ceasefire amid fresh fighting with Thailand along their disputed border, its envoy told the United Nations, according to news agency AFP. Thailand, had warned that the situation 'could potentially develop into a war' if not brought under control. Clashes broke out near the centuries-old Preah Vihear and Prasat Ta Muen Thom temples, with both sides exchanging rockets and artillery fire for a second straight day. The ancient temples, linked to the Khmer empire, remain a sensitive point in a long-running territorial dispute between the two neighbours.
The Hindu
41 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Judge blocks Trump's birthright citizenship restrictions in third ruling since high court decision
A federal judge on Friday (July 25, 2025) blocked the Trump administration from ending birthright citizenship for the children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally, issuing the third court ruling blocking the birthright order nationwide since a key Supreme Court decision in June. U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, joining another district court as well as an appellate panel of judges, found that a nationwide injunction granted to more than a dozen States remains in force under an exception to the Supreme Court ruling. That decision restricted the power of lower-court judges to issue nationwide injunctions. The States have argued Mr. Trump's birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for health insurance services that are contingent on citizenship status. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation's highest court. Lawyers for the government had argued Mr. Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be 'tailored to the States' purported financial injuries.' 'The record does not support a finding that any narrower option would feasibly and adequately protect the plaintiffs from the injuries they have shown they are likely to suffer,' Mr. Sorokin wrote. Mr. Sorokin acknowledged his order would not be the last word on birthright citizenship. Mr. Trump and his administration 'are entitled to pursue their interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and no doubt the Supreme Court will ultimately settle the question,' Mr. Sorokin wrote. 'But in the meantime, for purposes of this lawsuit at this juncture, the Executive Order is unconstitutional.' The administration has not yet appealed any of the recent court rulings. Mr. Trump's efforts to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily will remain blocked unless and until the Supreme Court says otherwise. An email asking for the White House's response to the ruling was sent on Friday. A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a ruling earlier this month prohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week, his order went into effect. On Wednesday (July 23, 2025), a San Francisco-based appeals court found the President's executive order unconstitutional and affirmed a lower court's nationwide block. A Maryland-based judge said this week that she would do the same if an appeals court signed off. The justices ruled last month that lower courts generally can't issue nationwide injunctions, but it didn't rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by States. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional. Plaintiffs in the Boston case earlier argued that the principle of birthright citizenship is 'enshrined in the Constitution,' and that Mr. Trump does not have the authority to issue the order, which they called a 'flagrantly unlawful attempt to strip hundreds of thousands of American-born children of their citizenship based on their parentage.' They also argue that Mr. Trump's order halting automatic citizenship for babies born to people in the U.S. illegally or temporarily would cost States funding they rely on to 'provide essential services' — from foster care to health care for low-income children, to 'early interventions for infants, toddlers, and students with disabilities.' At the heart of the lawsuits is the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was ratified in 1868 after the Civil War and the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision. That decision found that Mr. Scott, an enslaved man, wasn't a citizen despite having lived in a state where slavery was outlawed. The Trump administration has asserted that children of noncitizens are not 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States and therefore not entitled to citizenship.
Mint
41 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump Birthright Order Blocked Again in Fresh Legal Setback
President Donald Trump's executive order limiting birthright citizenship was blocked nationwide for the third time in less than a month, the latest sign that a US Supreme Court decision restricting 'universal injunctions' is having little impact on the dispute. The injunctions set up what is likely to be yet another set of appeals that could reach the Supreme Court, which has largely backed Trump in his broad crackdown on immigration. The justices haven't yet taken up the question of whether Trump's birthright citizenship order is constitutional. A federal judge in Boston ruled on Friday that an injunction pausing Trump's order nationwide is the only way to offer full protection to the Democratic-led states the filed the suit. The judge said his actions are in line with the Supreme Court's findings. US Judge Leo Sorokin said in his ruling that he could not narrow his injunction in part because Justice Department lawyers hadn't offered useful details about how such a ruling would work. 'With stakes this high, the court simply cannot adopt the defendants' blasé approach to the details and workability of a more limited injunction,' the judge said. A nationwide injunction protecting all affected babies was granted in a class-action suit in New Hampshire on July 10, while a federal appeals court this week upheld a similar block in a suit brought by four Democratic-led states. The new ruling comes in a suit brought by 18 states. A judge in a separate class-action suit is weighing another potential injunction. The Fight Over Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order: QuickTake Trump's order would restrict citizenship to babies with at least one parent who is a US citizen or green card holder. Critics say it violates a provision of the Constitution that grants citizenship to virtually every baby born in the US. The government says the directive closes a loophole that encourages illegal immigration. Trump's order was initially put on hold nationwide months ago in three separate cases. But the Supreme Court on June 27 paused those orders after ruling that judges generally can't issue nationwide injunctions that block federal policies outright. The justices returned the cases to the lower courts to weigh whether their injunctions needed to be narrowed or amended so that they provide relief only to the people or groups that sued. Sorokin held a hearing on the matter earlier this week. The Supreme Court's opinion, hailed as a major victory by the Trump administration, hasn't stopped judges from finding that broad injunctions against the president's birthright citizenship order are still necessary to protect US-born children of migrants while the cases proceed. In their request to maintain a nationwide injunction, the Democratic-led states said the Supreme Court's finding on so-called universal injunctions 'has no bearing on this case.' The states argue that a nationwide injunction is the only way to prevent harm that they say would be caused by allowing the executive order to take effect in some states, creating a chaotic patchwork of citizenship. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
