Trump's attack on Moraes could turn Bolsonaro's trial into an act for national sovereignty.
The Supreme Court must react to the US offensive with firm votes against foreign interference and harsher punishments for those involved in the attempted coup.
247 - The attempt by US President Donald Trump to influence the Supreme Federal Court's (STF) judgment on the coup plot involving Jair Bolsonaro (PL) is likely to backfire and prompt a strong institutional response from the Brazilian court. According to... FSPThe justices of the First Chamber of the Supreme Federal Court, responsible for judging the case, plan to register in their votes a firm defense of national sovereignty and the independence of the Judiciary in the face of the US offensive.
Sources within the Supreme Court, speaking to reporters, rule out any possibility of leniency in the judgment or punishment of the defendants, even in the face of the Trump administration's escalation against Brazil and against the court's justices. The internal assessment is that international interference only strengthens the understanding that it is necessary to reaffirm the country's commitment to its democratic and legal system.
One of the most sensitive points concerns the actions of federal deputy Eduardo Bolsonaro (PL-SP), who has sought formal support from the Trump administration to impose sanctions on Minister Alexandre de Moraes and other members of the Supreme Federal Court (STF). This maneuvering is being investigated in a Federal Police inquiry, in which Eduardo is suspected of obstruction of justice and coercion. Agents are analyzing the congressman's social media posts, considered as possible self-incrimination.
The expectation is that the investigation against the congressman will not last very long. The Supreme Court is already discussing whether to accept a potential indictment against Eduardo Bolsonaro after the conclusion of the trial concerning the central elements of the attempted coup, scheduled for September. The process is currently in the final arguments phase, with a deadline of August 13th for the defense to present its arguments.
Lawyers for four defendants consulted by Folha stated that Trump's actions are unlikely to have any practical effect. On the contrary, one of the defense teams believes that Bolsonaro's sentences could be even more severe, considering the new circumstances and Alexandre de Moraes' continued firm action in the case. One of the defense lawyers said he believes that "Trump's growing offensive reduces the chance of any leniency in the sentences or even of a possible pardon."
Washington's offensive even provoked an effect of internal cohesion within the Supreme Court. Members of the First Panel—composed of Alexandre de Moraes, Cristiano Zanin (president of the panel), Flávio Dino, and Luiz Fux—demonstrated unity in the face of the attempted interference. Even Fux, who disagreed with precautionary measures imposed on Bolsonaro, praised the independence of the Supreme Court. Zanin's criticisms were more discreet, but equally opposed to external interference.
The court had previously reacted when Eduardo Bolsonaro declared, from the US, that he would seek sanctions from the White House against members of the Supreme Federal Court (STF). The court then authorized the opening of an investigation against the congressman. Initially, the ministers preferred to ignore Trump's statements on social media, treating them as part of a rhetorical strategy without legal impact. This stance changed after the US government applied a 50% tariff on Brazilian products and invoked the Magnitsky Act against Moraes.
The legislation, originally created to punish dictators and human rights violators, aims to freeze assets and financially isolate its targets. In Brazil, the reaction came in an institutional form. Alexandre de Moraes, when voting on precautionary measures against Bolsonaro, such as the use of an electronic ankle monitor and a ban on leaving Brasília, classified the attempt by a foreign government to disrespect Brazilian law as "serious."
In his vote, Moraes wrote that: ""Brazilian legislation is subject to modification, but not to indiscriminate disregard, nor to negotiation of non-compliance with a foreign government, since no authority, however well-known and credible, is above the law." "The behavior of breaking with elementary rules of conduct in society becomes even more serious when one considers the announcement of new measures undertaken against the sovereignty of the country, the democratic rule of law, and Brazilian authorities," the magistrate emphasized at another point in the text.
Minister Flávio Dino went further, classifying Trump's action as a form of "hijacking of the Brazilian economy," suggesting that the measure's objective was to pressure for the dismissal of the case against Bolsonaro. "This 'hijacking' will certainly merit much academic study, including at universities in the United States, due to its utterly bizarre nature," he stated.
The president of the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF), Luís Roberto Barroso, also took a stand. In an official letter, although without directly mentioning Trump, he stated that the sanctions announced by the US are based on an “inaccurate understanding of the facts” related to the case against Bolsonaro. At the same time, Barroso has argued that the court's response should be technical and independent, in order to avoid a further escalation of the diplomatic crisis with the United States.
In the virtual hearing regarding the precautionary measures, the ministers' votes reinforced the perception that the process could take on symbolic dimensions in the defense of national sovereignty. Even Luiz Fux, who disagreed with the measures imposed, made a point of highlighting the Judiciary's autonomy in the face of external pressures.
