STF makes it clear that there will be no retreat in relation to Bolsonaro

Trump’s rhetoric did not intimidate the court. On the contrary: it deepened the feeling that Brazil faces a test of sovereignty and institutional independence

Donald Trump’s surprising threat to impose up to 50% tariffs on Brazil due to judicial investigation against his political ally, former President Jair Bolsonaro, took the Supreme Court (STF) completely unprepared. In the midst of July, with part of the ministers abroad, the Court faced difficulty even to gather its members and articulate an immediate response.

Even so, ministers directly linked to the case, such as Alexandre de Moraes-rapporteur of inquiries investigating Bolsonaro for attempted coup and digital disinformation-began to discuss an institutional reaction to the speech of former US president, who classified investigations as part of a “witch hunt.” According to sources close to the discussions, the initial proposal of this group was that the Supreme Court disclose a public note reaffirming the independence of Brazilian justice and rebutting Trump’s rhetoric.

Also read:
Bolsonaro’s phone and data is in the hands of PF, now what?
On the edge of the commercial abyss with the US, the EU intends to react

The most direct reaction, however, was eventually coordinated with President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. In a conversation with the president of the Supreme Court, Minister Luís Roberto Barroso, it was decided that the first demonstration should start from the executive. And that’s what happened: that same night, Lula stated that Brazil is “a sovereign country, with independent institutions”, sending a direct message to Washington without expanding the tone of confrontation.

According to STF interlocutors heard under anonymity, the priority was not to relieve tensions with the US, but affirm the Brazilian institutional autonomy Faced with an interference considered unacceptable. Trump’s speech not only crossed traditional diplomatic limits, but has reinforced the perception among the court ministers that Brazil is facing a crucial test for their democracy – and will not retreat.

— If there was any expectation that the threats would generate fear in the Supreme Court, the effect was precisely the oppositeevaluated Thiago de Aragão, director of the consultancy Arko International, based in Washington. Ministers’ willingness to take the processes to the end has increased, especially because they want to show their sovereignty and independence.

Backstage pressures

The tensions, however, did not start with Trump’s announcement on July 9. Since the beginning of the year, diplomats of American embassy in Brasilia They were already warning STF ministers on the impacts that the advance of Bolsonaro investigations could generate on trade relations between the two countries. The warnings, according to sources near the court, were initially received with skepticism and even irony.

The perception was that the US would never get involved so directly in a internal judicial processespecially in a democratic country like Brazil. But, it seems, both the STF ministers and Trump himself underestimated the other side.

The recent climbing included, in addition to tariff threats, concrete measures. Brazilian justice ordered the use of electronic anklet by Bolsonaro, on the grounds of risk of escape, and the United States retaliated with the revocation of US entry visas to Alexandre de Moraes and other ministers of the Supreme. It is a crisis of unprecedented contours, which reflects not only a diplomatic conflict, but a deep shock between institutional models and views of democracy.

The difference between the supreme cuts

Comparisons between the two countries are inevitable-and not always flattered to the US system. Following the coup attack of January 8, 2023 in Brazil, promoted by Bolsonaro supporters, the parallels with the Capitol invasion of the US on January 6, 2021, were immediate. Both movements were led by militancy mobilized by leaders who refused to accept their electoral defeats. But the destination of each case was quite different.

In the United States, the Supreme Court decided this year that Trump enjoys partial immunity by acts committed as presidentwhich practically buried the chances of him being tried for an attempt to blow before the new election. With his return to the presidency, the process was closed. In Brazil, the judicial response was hard and firm – and is still in progress.

Alexandre de Moraes, the minister most targeted by Bolsonarism, became The best known face of the institutional reaction to undemocratic attacks. At 56, he accumulates controversial decisions, such as blocking accounts on social networks accused of spreading misinformation, and faces criticism from the far right out of supposed abuse of power. Moraes has already crashed public clashes with Elon Musk after restricting access to X (former Twitter) in Brazil and became the target of an international campaign led by Eduardo Bolsonaroson of the former president, who tries to pressure US officials to impose sanctions against the magistrate.

Despite criticism, Moraes is not isolated. Most of the 11 court ministers shares the conviction that are defending Brazilian democracy against real threatsand that the Bolsonaro case symbolizes an institutional watershed. In this context, Trump’s rhetoric not only fails to intimidate, but fuel to reinforce the role of the STF as a pillar of democratic resistance.

Consequences and scenario ahead

The current crisis shows that tensions between Brazil and the United States exceed conventional diplomatic channels. It is a clash between two styles of government and two interpretations of the role of the judiciary in times of threat to the democratic order.

On the Brazilian side, the bet is in the continuity of the judicial process based on the constitution and respect for the separation of powers. On the American side – at least under Trump – the way has been the politicization of justice and the use of commercial tools as a form of geopolitical pressure.

It remains to know how far this clash can climb. What already seems clear is that the Federal Supreme Court does not intend to retreat. On the contrary, Trump’s attacks and their allies only consolidated the internal conviction that the moment requires firmness and unity.

For Brazil, the coming months will be decisive: not only in the judicial field, with the consequences of Bolsonaro’s trial, but also in the International Arena, where the defense of national sovereignty will be placed to the test. And in this board, the court seems willing to occupy its space – independently and now, with even more determination.

The bluntness with which the Brazilian judiciary has been responding to threats to democracy – both internal and external – has been a cause for international comparisons. For Professor Robert Dias, constitutionalist at the Getúlio Vargas Foundation (FGV), in São Paulo, the difference between Brazil and the United States has become evident in recent years.

— I see Brazil with mechanisms to protect democracy much more efficient than those we saw in the USAsays. The American Constitution has strength only when institutional actors are loyal to it.

And Brazil demonstrated this loyalty quickly. In 2023, the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) – composed of ministers of the Supreme Court (STF) in rotation – condemned Jair Bolsonaro to ineligibility for eight years after he propagated false allegations of electoral fraud. The decision was seen as a fresh and decisive response to contain attempts to undermine the democratic system.

In the same measure, the Federal Supreme Court agreed upon the criminal case against Bolsonaro for the episode of January 8, 2023, when its supporters invaded and depredated the headquarters of the three powers in Brasilia. In November 2024, the Federal Police concluded for the attempted coup. Shortly thereafter, the Supreme Court authorized the trial.

This arrangement of the court in a quick manner has been criticized by Bolsonaro allies, who claim political persecution and question the impartiality of the magistrates. But the judges themselves began to rebut these accusations publicly.

In a letter released on July 13, the president of the Supreme Court, Luís Roberto Barroso, defended the active role of the Court at the current Brazilian political moment.

— An independent and active court was necessary to avoid collapse of institutions, as occurred in several countries around the world, from Eastern Europe to Latin Americahe wrote. The Federal Supreme Court will judge independently and based on evidence.

Even during the July recess, Minister Alexandre de Moraes continued to work in the process. On the 14th, the Attorney General’s Office presented its final allegations, requesting the conviction of the former president. The trial is expected to take place in August, as soon as the STF resumes its work.

Trump presses, but ministers keep the line

The political scenario, however, is far from domestic. The threats of former US President Donald Trump of 50% tariffs to Brazil If Bolsonaro is convicted, they marked an unprecedented diplomatic escalation. Trump has accused the Brazilian government of “censorship” and “political persecution,” in a clear attempt to interfere with internal affairs of another sovereign country.

— I sincerely hope that the Government of Brazil will change its course, stop attacking political opponents and end its ridiculous censorship regimeTrump wrote in a letter sent to Bolsonaro last Thursday. I’ll be following up close.

Behind this movement are known figures of the Bolsanist Wing. Eduardo Bolsonarofederal deputy and son of the former president, and Paulo Figueiredoconservative influencer and grandson of the last president of the military regime, the last days have spent Washingtonin meetings in the State Department and, according to them, even in the White House.

Both have worked as informal information channels about Brazil within Trump’s team. Diplomatic sources point out that, in a reflection of the unconventional diplomacy of former US President Eduardo and Figueiredo exert directly on their view on the direction of Brazilian politics.

— The position of all was unanimous: there will be no millimeter of concession less than Brazil takes the first stepsaid Figueiredo in an interview after the meetings. The warning we heard was: ‘If things continue at this pace, President Trump can take additional measures, which may even involve the financial market.’

A judgment with global impact

Behind the scenes of the Supreme Court, however, the climate is of firmness. The Court understands that it is facing a historical judgmentwhich is not limited to the figure of Bolsonaro, but to the future of Brazilian democracy itself. For most ministers, the case represents a watershed, with not only national but international repercussions – especially after the January 2023 frustrated blow.

The comparison with the United States is inevitable. There, after the capitol disorders on January 6, 2021, the Supreme Court decided that Donald Trump had partial immunitywhich freed him from being tried before the elections and, with his victory, practically filed the case.

In Brazil, the scenario is different: the institutions decided not to retreat in the pressure and want to respond even before the 2026 elections. It is a sign that, contrary to what the pocket wing expected, External pressure is further uniting the Federal Supreme Court around its constitutional mission.

With the end of the recess approaching and the judicial agenda heating, the expectation now revolves around when, exactly, Bolsonaro’s judgment will occur – and what will be its effects on Brazilian politics and foreign relations with the US. What seems right is that The Supreme Court does not intend to give in or retreat.

What is at stake is not just a judicial verdict. It is the country’s own institutional balance.

With information from Bloomberg*