&w=3840&q=100)
Brazil's top court defies Trump, signals no retreat on Bolsonaro probe
The top court is in recess during July — not all its judges were even in the country — making it difficult to convene to formulate a response. But a group of justices including Alexandre de Moraes, who is overseeing the former president's case, immediately began discussing a response aimed more at asserting national sovereignty than easing tensions with the US.
Just after Trump threatened 50 per cent tariffs on Brazil on July 9, this group advocated for the court to issue a statement challenging the US president's assertion of a 'Witch Hunt,' according to two people with knowledge of how the events unfolded. In the end, Chief Justice Luis Roberto Barroso agreed in a call with President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva that the first response should come from the political sphere, a third person said, all of them asking not be named discussing private deliberations.
'If there was some expectation that the threats would generate some fear in the Brazilian Supreme Court, the effect is the opposite,' said Thiago de Aragao, head of Arko International, a Washington-based consultancy. 'Their willingness to go through this all the way to the end is much higher, especially because they want to demonstrate their sovereignty and independence.'
That reality signals turbulence ahead between Latin America's economic and political heavyweight helmed by a seasoned leftist leader and an unapologetically mercantilist US under a president who is now largely unfettered by legal constraints. Since then, Trump reiterated his tariff threats in an open letter, Brazil's top court ordered Bolsonaro to wear an ankle monitor alleging a flight risk, and the US State Department revoked US visas for Moraes and other justices.
Early warnings
It's a clash of personalities and political cultures that's been building for some time.
Since early this year, officials from the US embassy in Brasilia had reached out to Brazil's Supreme Court to warn that the ongoing investigation into whether Bolsonaro had sought to overturn his 2022 election loss threatened to harm trade relations, according to one of the people with knowledge of the conversations.
Brazil's Supreme Court didn't reply to a request for comment. The US embassy said it has made clear its 'concern about the politicization of the investigations' involving Bolsonaro and his supporters. The issue has been raised 'during interactions with Brazilian authorities, for some time now,' according to the July 18 statement issued by the embassy's press office in Portuguese.
Brazilian justices aware of the advisories initially shrugged them off as absurd. There was no way, they reasoned, the US would intervene in what was ultimately a domestic legal affair, one of the people said.
But if Brazilian judges had underestimated the White House, it quickly became clear that Trump, too, had miscalculated.
To the majority of the court's members, the Bolsonaro case is part of a larger fight to safeguard a relatively young democracy the former Army captain allegedly put in peril. And unlike the US Supreme Court, which helped clear the way for Trump's return to power despite charges that he illegally conspired to overturn his 2020 defeat, Brazil's has no intention of giving in.
The court's determination is typically ascribed — by supporters and critics alike — to Moraes, the crusading justice overseeing both the coup trial and spearheading an aggressive campaign against social-media disinformation that has also drawn the ire of Trump and members of his movement.
As part of his efforts, the 56-year-old judge has ordered the removal of accounts accused of spreading fake news from platforms like X, Rumble and Meta's Facebook. He's clashed with right-wing journalists and commentators who say he's abusing his power to target political opponents, and last year waged a public tussle with Elon Musk after banning access to X in Brazil.
His prominent role in Brazil's most high-profile legal fights has turned him into the supervillain of Bolsonaro's movement: Eduardo Bolsonaro, a son of the former president, has spent months in the US lobbying Washington to put sanctions on the judge. Moraes has declined requests for comment.
US, Brazil parallels
In reality, the majority of the court's 11 members are united in the belief that they are waging an existential fight for Brazilian democracy — one with implications that stretch far beyond Brazil's borders.
It's a view that solidified in the wake of the 2023 insurrection attempt in which thousands of Bolsonaro supporters ransacked major government buildings, including the Supreme Court, the presidential palace and Congress — events that drew natural comparisons to the Capitol riots in Washington that followed Trump's 2020 defeat. Even the dates were similar: the US rioting came on Jan. 6; Brazil's attempted coup was Jan. 8.
As clear as the parallels are, the responses from the country's Supreme Courts couldn't be much different. The US tribunal ruled in 2024 that Trump enjoyed some immunity from criminal charges over his efforts to overturn the results, effectively killing chances of a trial before last year's election. His subsequent victory put an end to the case altogether.
'I see Brazil with mechanisms to protect its democracy that are much efficient what we've seen in the US,' said Robert Dias, a professor of constitutional law at Getulio Vargas Foundation law school in Sao Paulo. 'The American constitution only has force when institutional actors are loyal to it.'
Brazil, by contrast, moved swiftly: In 2023, its electoral court — a separate body made up of a rotating cast of Supreme Court justices — barred Bolsonaro from holding office for eight years for spreading voter fraud conspiracies, ending any chance of a swift return to the presidency.
The judicial system has moved similarly rapidly to find the culprits the Jan. 8 2023 insurrection in Brasilia. Federal police recommended the coup attempt charges in November 2024. Within months, the Supreme Court had approved them and set the stage for a trial.
More outspoken by tradition than their American counterparts, the justices have left little doubt about their motivations: They want to conclude the trial before Brazilians vote again in October 2026.
That has added fuel to claims that they've predetermined the outcome and robbed Bolsonaro of due process. But in recent days, judges have pushed back, arguing that their aggressive approach was necessary to avoid the sort of democratic collapse that has happened elsewhere.
'An independent and active court was necessary to prevent the collapse of institutions, as has occurred in several countries around the world, from Eastern Europe to Latin America,' Chief Justice Barroso wrote in a letter published on its website on July 13. 'The Supreme Federal Court will judge independently and based on the evidence.'
Despite the July recess, Moraes continued working, and Bolsonaro's case proceeded as normal. the Prosecutor General's Office submitted its closing arguments on July 14, requesting his conviction for the attempted coup.
The Supreme Court is expected to return from recess in August and likely to conclude the case soon. What remains uncertain is how far Trump is willing to go to support Bolsonaro.
Eduardo Bolsonaro and conservative digital influencer Paulo Figueiredo, grandson of the last president of the military dictatorship that ruled Brazil from 1964 to 1985, spent the past several days in Washington in meetings at the State Department and, according to them, at the White House.
In a sign of Trump's unconventional diplomacy, Eduardo and Figueiredo have become key sources of information about Brazil for his administration, according to diplomatic sources.
'Everyone's position was unanimous: There will not be a millimeter of concession unless Brazil takes the first step,' Figueiredo said Wednesday of the meetings held in Washington. 'The warning we heard was: 'If things continue at this pace, President Trump may take additional measures, which could even involve the financial market.''
Donald Trump has so far said he won't back down.
'It is my sincere hope that the Government of Brazil changes course, stops attacking political opponents, and ends their ridiculous censorship regime,' Trump wrote in the letter addressed to Bolsonaro Thursday night. 'I will be watching closely.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
2 minutes ago
- Economic Times
When will voters blame Trump for this economy?
Donald Trump's economic policies face scrutiny as Americans grapple with financial challenges. Polls reveal concerns about inflation and the impact of Trump's economic agenda. Blue-collar voters express worries over tariffs. Republicans risk political setbacks in upcoming elections. The party's future hinges on voter sentiment and the strength of the Democratic alternative. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads President Donald Trump has claimed responsibility for the economy virtually every day since his inauguration. Late last week, the White House declared it a smashing success in a press release called '200 Days of Winning: President Trump is Keeping His Promises.' Yet many Americans are still struggling to get by amid mediocre economic growth and difficulty affording necessities, from groceries to prompts a key political question: When will voters hold Trump — now back on the job for more than six months — responsible for their financial plight? The answer could decide the battle for Congress in the 2026 midterm elections and determine the fight to succeed Trump in the White House in an early August YouGov poll for The Economist, voters' No. 1 issue was 'inflation/prices,' which at 21% beat the next most important concern, 'jobs/economy' by 7 percentage points. Trump's job approval rating in this survey was cratering at 41%. The president's handling of the economy rated roughly the same, at 40%. Those poor numbers are driven in part by dour reviews from independents and fit with recent data produced by Democratic a poll conducted in late July for the centrist Democratic think tank Third Way, Trump's job approval rating clocked in higher than the YouGov survey, hitting 45%. But a 41% plurality of registered voters said the president's second term was unfolding as 'worse' than expected and only 42% approved of his signature economic package, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law on July 4. Approval of the OBBBA among independents, according to this poll? A dismal 32%.Moreover, an early summer Democratic poll shows that 58% of voters view the economy as 'Trump's economy,' versus blaming former President Joe if the polls are accurate, Trump's blue-collar voters are running out of patience. 'In the spring, many [blue collar voters] were willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt on his tariff plan — but by summer, many expressed serious concerns that tariffs are hurting their lives by making things more expensive,' reads a July 30 analysis of a focus group conducted by The Working Class Project, an initiative led by a Democratic super together, these findings put congressional Republicans in dire straits. And if such views proliferate among the electorate, it's not only Republicans on Capitol Hill who will feel the political pinch. Republicans vying to succeed Trump in 2028, especially Vice President JD Vance, could pay an extremely high of course, there are other surveys, and other ways of interpreting the begin with Trump's average job approval rating, calculated by RealClearPolitics at 45.7%. That's not half bad in our polarized times. The president's handling of the economy rated a similar 45% in CNBC's 'All America Economic Survey' fielded from July 3 through Aug. 3. Granted, that was a high-water mark in recent assessments of Trump's leadership on this the president's fate, and that of his party, will rest not only with how voters feel about the economy and the effectiveness of his governing agenda, but also on what the political alternative on the eve of President Barack Obama's reelection in 2012, the unemployment rate was hovering like a dark cloud over the economy at 7.9%, up one point from the previous month. That's a lot of Americans out of work — and nearly double the 4.1% rate just prior to Election Day 2024. But Republican Mitt Romney, a career businessman and corporate turnaround artist, did not ride those grim numbers into the White Heye, a Republican strategist in Washington active in campaigns during the Obama era, said there's a lesson there for Democrats assuming Trump and the GOP are inexorably doomed based on voters' economic anxiety. But so, too, must Republicans be careful not to assume the trade deals Trump has lately touted, and macro indicators showing a resilient if not entirely strong U.S. economy, will produce electoral victory.'It's a fluid thing,' Heye, an occasional Trump critic, told explained that Trump has been given some latitude (and time) by voters to improve the economy because they blamed Biden almost entirely for the inflation that spiked on his watch, even though higher prices were in part a reaction to the coronavirus pandemic, and resulting public policy decisions, that began during Trump's first term. 'That hangover that remains continues to give Trump the ability to blame things on Biden.'When might voters finally absolve Biden of responsibility and point fingers at Trump? 'Companies are absorbing costs thus far on tariffs. That's not going to last forever,' Heye another parallel with Obama might be 44th president pursued health care reform, convinced the eventual Affordable Care Act was good public policy and, as politicians are wont to say, therefore good politics. But in the short term, the law known as Obamacare was a political disaster for Democrats, costing the party 63 seats in the House seats and seven in the Senate. With Trump's firm belief in tariffs and insistence on building a protectionist moat around voters' access to foreign products, a 'shellacking' of his own can't be ruled out. But of course, it matters what kind of alternative Democrats are offering.
The Hindu
4 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Is a ‘potentiality of abuse' of BNS Section 152 a ground to declare the law unconstitutional, asks the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (August 12, 2025) asked if 'potentiality of abuse' by the state of Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which punishes 'acts endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India', could be a ground to declare the law itself unconstitutional. A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi raised the question to senior advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, appearing for the Foundation of Independent Journalism and Siddharth Varadarajan, one of the founding editors of the online news portal The Wire, who is facing a First Information Report (FIR) under Section 152 and other offences under the BNS at Morigaon Police Station, Assam, for the publication of a news article. The petition submitted that the arrest of Mr. Varadarajan and/or others was 'imminent'. The Bench protected Mr. Varadarajan and the members of the Foundation from any coercive action by the police. It issued notice to the Union government and the State of Assam, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, while noting that a Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India had issued notice on a separate petition, filed by S.G. Vombatkere, identically challenging Section 152 a few days ago, on August 8. Ms. Ramakrishnan argued that Section 152 of the BNS, though worded differently and avoiding the term 'sedition', was 'in essence' the colonial sedition provision of Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). BNS had replaced the IPC at a time when the legality of Section 124A was considered suspect by the apex court, and had been referred to a Constitution Bench for judicial scrutiny and an authoritative pronouncement. The senior counsel submitted that Section 152 was vaguely worded, its ambiguity cloaking an immense capacity to chill free speech, especially of journalists. At this point, Justice Bagchi agreed with Ms. Ramakrishnan that vagueness in a penal provision was a valid ground to challenge it. He referred to how the apex court had struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act for its vague terminology, which indirectly worked to aid authorities to use arrest as a tool to crush dissent. Justice Bagchi said the apex court's judgment in the Kedar Nath Singh case had clearly defined that sedition could not be invoked under Section 124A until there was clear proof that words or action had incited violence. 'The acts which come within Section 124A and Section 152, by way of comparative interpretation, would be covered by the ratio of the Kedar Nath Singh verdict that unless there is a clear threat to unity and sovereignty, the offence [of sedition] need not be attracted,' Justice Bagchi observed. Justice Kant said a general list of acts endangering sovereignty could not be prepared by the court; it would depend on a case by case basis 'For example, mere political dissent cannot endanger sovereignty,' Justice Kant said. Again, on the issue of the vagueness of Section 152, Justice Kant indicated that being too specific would also be an invitation for trouble. 'Inviting the Legislature to define 'sovereignty' would be a big danger,' Justice Kant remarked. Mr. Mehta asked whether a challenge to a provision could be used as a ground to gain anticipatory bail or seek the quashing of an FIR under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Justice Kant responded by asking Mr. Mehta whether custodial interrogation was necessary in the case of journalists. 'When media persons get entangled, it is usually something they wrote or a programme aired, etc… These are matters which do not require custodial interrogation,' Justice Kant addressed the law officer. Mr. Mehta replied that journalists could not be considered a 'separate class' while applying the provisions of the criminal law. 'No, but we are on the balancing of their [journalists'] fundamental right to speech against your [the state's] right to investigate and maintain public order,' Justice Bagchi clarified to Mr. Mehta.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
4 minutes ago
- First Post
For the love of gold: Inside the Oval Office makeover by Donald Trump
Donald Trump has given his White House Oval Office a 'golden' makeover. With gold trim, trophies, and a gilded seal, Trump has replaced Biden's simpler decor. Here's what has changed read more The Oval Office has had a bit of a makeover recently. Every president leaves their mark on the White House, swapping out decor and rearranging details to reflect their style and priorities. But in his second term, Donald Trump has taken that tradition in a flashier direction with his not-so-subtle love for gold, glitz, and unapologetic grandeur. 'The transformation has been gradual and unmistakable… By February, some golden urns on the mantle. April, gold adornments appear on the walls. By July, it's gold everywhere. Just this week more scaffolding popped up, even more new gold trim appeared,' Acyn Torabi, a journalist, wrote on Trump's new glitzy new 'gold' Oval Office. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD So what has changed? And how does it differ from what his predecessor, Joe Biden, did? Here's a closer look. Golden embellishments Under Joe Biden, the Oval Office ceiling was simple, cream wallpaper with matching crown moulding and no extra flourishes. Donald Trump has taken that understated look in a very different direction. He added gold trim to the crown moulding, pairing it with the gold curtains that have hung in the office since Biden's term. US President Donald Trump shakes hands with Apple CEO Tim Cook in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on August 6, 2025. File image/AFP The greenery that once sat on the mantel, a potted Swedish ivy, was also removed. In its place now stand nine gold trophies, most of them made in Europe. Critics say the changes make the Oval Office resemble the royal palaces America once fought to break away from. But Trump sees it differently. Speaking to Fox News in March, he said the office 'needed a little life,' so he chose gold. 'They say angels bring good luck,' he explained. 'And we need a lot of luck in this country with what they have done over the last four years.' The greenery that once sat on the mantel, a potted Swedish ivy, was also removed. In its place now stand nine gold trophies, most of them made in Europe. By April, the gold touches were impossible to ignore. That's when Trump's 'gold guy,' John Icart, the same craftsman who worked on Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate, was flown in from South Florida. According to officials, Icart added gold accents to the mantel, walls, and mouldings, and even delivered golden cherubs that now sit on display. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump also brought in smaller gold details, such as coasters, branded with his name. A golden presidential seal The presidential seal on the Oval Office ceiling has been there for decades. Franklin D. Roosevelt first added the plaster relief during a 1934 renovation, and for years, it remained a subtle detail. Not anymore. In Trump's latest overhaul, the seal and the surrounding stars have been painted in gilded gold, making them stand out far more than before. The presidential seal on the Oval Office ceiling has been there for decades. In Trump's latest overhaul, the seal and the surrounding stars have been painted in gilded gold. AFP But to be fair, Trump's taste for gold is nothing new. His Trump Tower penthouse in New York is lined with gilded ceilings, furniture, and artwork. At Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Palm Beach, even the ballroom gleams with gold from floor to ceiling. Rugs, flags & portraits One of Trump's first moves after returning to the White House was to swap out the Oval Office rug and change up the portraits. Gone is the dark blue rug, originally made for Bill Clinton, that featured the presidential seal in the centre. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Gone is the dark blue rug, originally made for Bill Clinton, that featured the presidential seal in the centre. File image/ AFP In its place, Trump brought back a lighter rug once used by Ronald Reagan. The design still includes the presidential seal, but also features a sunbeam pattern and olive branches around the border, meant to symbolise peace. It's the same rug Trump used during his first term. Trump brought back a lighter rug once used by Ronald Reagan. AFP Trump's Oval Office also now feature the flags of the Army, the Marine Corps, and the Navy. Trump's Oval Office also now feature the flags of the Army, the Marine Corps, and the Navy. AFP The walls have had just as big a shake-up. Under Biden, the Entrance Hall displayed Barack Obama's official White House portrait, a hyper-realistic painting showing the former president in a navy suit. That's now gone, replaced by a painting of Trump himself. The new piece, by artist Marc Lipp, is based on a photo taken moments after the assassination attempt at Trump's rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, showing him with his fist raised. Barack Obama's portrait was replaced with Trump's after the assassination attempt at his rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, showing him with his fist raised. AFP Trump didn't stop there. He's added more portraits in ornate frames, turning one wall into a kind of gallery. He also replaced Biden's portrait of Franklin D Roosevelt with a portrait of George Washington. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The Rose Garden refresh The White House Rose Garden has been through many changes over the decades. Originally designed in 1913 by First Lady Ellen Wilson as a formal flower garden, it was later reimagined as a grassy lawn for press conferences and official events. In 2020, Melania Trump added a limestone border around the grass, but in his second term, Trump went much further. The lawn is now gone, replaced with concrete and stone tiles, giving the space the look and feel of a Mar-a-Lago-style patio. The White House Rose Garden has been through many changes over the decades. The lawn is now gone, replaced with concrete and stone tiles, giving the space the look and feel of a Mar-a-Lago-style patio. AFP Trump has been open about why he made the change. Speaking to Fox News in March, he said the grass was simply 'impractical' for big gatherings, especially when it rained. 'The grass just doesn't work,' he told host Laura Ingraham. 'It gets wet, and people in high heels can't walk on it. This way, it works for everyone.' A ballroom in the works Trump's taste for big, bold spaces isn't stopping at the Rose Garden. His next project is on a much grander scale: a $200 million state ballroom in the East Wing. The White House's current largest state room, the East Room, holds around 200 people. The planned ballroom will triple that, with a seating capacity of 650 and an expansive 90,000 square feet of space. The White House has called it a 'much-needed and exquisite addition.' Trump says the funding will come from himself and 'patriot donors,' not taxpayers. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD It's not hard to guess what kind of look he's going for, if his past projects are anything to go by, expect a lot of shine and a whole lot of spectacle. With input from agencies
