US Florida Court Allows Brazilian Government to Defend Justice Moraes Against Trump Media and Rumble Lawsuit

A federal court in Florida ruled on Tuesday, June 23, that the Brazilian government, represented by the Attorney General's Office (AGU), may intervene in a lawsuit filed by Trump Media and the Rumble platform against Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes. The same decision rejected the platforms' request to proceed with a default judgment against Moraes, who had not directly responded to the proceedings.

Trump Media and Rumble filed suit in the United States challenging orders issued by Moraes that blocked accounts on social media platforms. The companies argue that these measures violate the First Amendment to the US Constitution, which protects freedom of expression, and infringe federal communications laws and Florida's recognition of foreign court judgments. The platforms claimed that Moraes was served via email in May through an alternative procedure and that his response deadline of June 15 passed without response.

Judge Mary Scriven accepted Brazil's intervention motion, recognizing the country as the "real interested party" in the dispute. The Brazilian government's central argument rests on the principle of sovereign immunity under international law, asserting that acts of authorities from a sovereign state cannot be judged by foreign courts without consent. The AGU contends that any challenges to Brazilian Supreme Court decisions must be resolved exclusively within Brazil's judicial system and cannot be reviewed by US courts.

With Brazil's entry into the case, Scriven suspended any possibility of a default judgment pending resolution of Brazil's motion to dismiss the case. The judge annulled a previous directive requiring the platforms to request the default judgment and ruled that such a request may only be resubmitted in the future if Brazil's jurisdictional objections are resolved. Trump Media and Rumble have 14 days to file a formal response to Brazil's arguments.

The case represents a significant clash between Brazilian judicial authority and US constitutional protections. While Moraes' directives are considered constitutionally protected exercises of judicial function under Brazilian law and cannot result in personal liability for the justice, the American companies continue seeking to overturn these orders in US courts. The Brazilian government has already filed a motion to dismiss the entire action, though the court has deferred its final decision on case termination.