Alexandre de Moraes

2020 Brazil judiciary fake news inquiry

In April 2019, Supreme Federal Court president Dias Toffoli, a former legal representative for the Workers' Party (PT) in the presidential campaigns of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in 1998, 2002 and 2006, launched an inquiry to investigate personal attacks and statements against court members. Moraes was chosen as its rapporteur. That month, Crusoé magazine reported that a document from Operation Car Wash revealed that then-Solicitor General Toffoli was also involved in the Odebrecht scandal, according to the company's former chairman Marcelo Odebrecht. On 15 April, Moraes ordered that Crusoé take down the article from their website. Toffoli himself later requested a probe into whether Crusoé illegally leaked the document. The Court's decision on the matter was criticized by outlets such as The Intercept on the basis of censorship and attack on the freedom of the press. On 27 May 2020, as part of that same inquiry, the Federal Police launched an operation probing businessmen, bloggers and politicians allied to President Jair Bolsonaro.

On 19 March 2022, Moraes ordered the suspension of the messaging app Telegram, accusing it of repeatedly failing to block accounts spreading disinformation, and ignoring previous court decisions. President Bolsonaro called the ruling "inadmissible", while Telegram founder Pavel Durov blamed the company's failings on email issues, pledging to do a better job.

In October 2022, the Superior Electoral Court gave Moraes the unilateral authority to order the removal of online content that did not comply with previous TSE rulings, as part of an effort to combat disinformation. Bolsonaro supporters and legal experts criticized the move, fearing that it could allow for censorship. Moraes cited the proliferation of false information and hate speech when initially proposing the move to the Superior Electoral Court.

On 30 October 2022, during the second round of the presidential election between Bolsonaro and Lula da Silva, hundreds of roadblocks set up by the Federal Highway Police (PRF), under orders from the government, prevented voters from going to the polls in Northeastern Brazil. Moraes summoned the director of the PRF, Silvinei Vasques, and threatened him with imprisonment if he did not lift the blockades.

8 January 2023 attacks in Brasília

Shortly after the 8 January 2023 attacks in Brasília, Moraes ordered the arrest of the former commander of the Military Police of the Federal District, Fabio Augusto Vieira, the former secretary of Public Security of the Federal District and former Justice Minister, Anderson Torres, and enacted a federal interference for the removal of the Governor of the Federal District Ibaneis Rocha.

Twitter suspension in Brazil

In Brazilian law it is understood that freedom of expression cannot overlap with other rights; for example, media outlets cannot propagate racism, disseminate prejudice or violate people's privacy. The Brazilian Constitution provides that the freedom of one individual cannot harm that of another. Section X of article 5, for example, determines the protection of intimacy, privacy, honor and image of people.

In April 2024, X (formerly Twitter) owner Elon Musk accused Moraes of "brazenly and repeatedly betraying the constitution and people of Brazil" in response to the Supreme Federal Court's order to block several X accounts, arguing combat of digital militias. This in turn resulted in the Supreme Federal Court opening a criminal inquiry against Musk for spreading hate speech, encouragement of violence, data exposure and alleged obstruction of investigations. The exchange has elicited mixed reactions both from Brazilian politicians as well as international netizens. In August 2024, X's press service accused Moraes of threatening to arrest the social network's employees in Brazil for failing to comply with blocking orders. In response, X announced the closure of its representative office in the country. Elon Musk again lashed out at the judge and proposed impeaching him.

On 30 August 2024, X was suspended nationwide for failing to follow the directive, and Moraes set a fine of 50,000 Brazilian reais (roughly $8,900 USD) per day for anyone using VPNs to access it. Shortly thereafter, X created the @AlexandreFiles account, purportedly in order to "reveal the unlawful directives issued to X by Alexandre de Moraes" and posted several allegedly illegal court requests that had made of X. On 2 September, the Supreme Court of Brazil upheld the ruling by Moraes.

Days later, Musk attempted to circumvent the X suspension by migrating part of his operations to computers from the company CloudFlare and others that offer a service called reverse proxy. He said he did so because "the X blockade in Brazil harmed service to other Latin American countries and that the return of availability for Brazilians was an 'unforeseen' side effect." However, the National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel) denied this and stated that "the change in servers indicates 'deliberate intent to disregard the STF order.'" On 20 September, Musk backed down, lowered his tone against the Brazilian justice system and accepted the decision to appoint a legal representative in Brazil.

According to Moraes, social media has been a major catalyst for harmful speech, whether it be fake news or an attack on the [judicial/political] system. Through these platforms, extremist groups have been found in "bubbles" to spread hate and attack democratic instruments:

"An extremist populism, mainly from the far-right, that has learned from the strategic mistakes of the Nazi and fascist regimes and, instead of attacking the system, has been corroding it from within. Instead of saying that democracy is bad, it says that the instruments are being rigged. Instead of saying that freedom of the press is bad, it says that it defends [the press], but that the media is distorting freedom of expression [...] People who were ashamed of making racist jokes now see social media as a racist social bubble, and they are now proud. They are cowards in real life and brave on social media. What made this possible? These issues linked to the flaws of democracy, especially the issue of income distribution". He concluded that the excessive concentration of income in the hands of a few, together with an economic crisis in several sectors, and enhanced by [social] networks, would have encouraged attacks on democracy.

Trump administration sanctions

On 18 July 2025, after authorizing an operation against Jair Bolsonaro, who was required to wear an electronic tag and be confined to his home at night and on weekends, Alexandre de Moraes was attacked by the Trump administration over his visa. The decision was announced by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and would have consequences for Moraes's family and "allies". According to Rubio, "the political prosecution of Brazilian judge Alexandre de Moraes against Jair Bolsonaro has created a complex of persecution and censorship so widespread that it not only violates the fundamental rights of Brazilians, but also transcends Brazil's borders and targets Americans." The American diplomat concluded the text by stating that he "ordered the immediate suspension of the visas of Alexandre de Moraes and his allies, as well as those of their immediate family members."

On 30 July 2025, Moraes was added to the sanctions list established by the US government under the Magnitsky Act, despite the fact that he has no accounts, investments, or assets in the US. As a result, the minister might even have difficulty receiving his salary, despite being paid by Banco do Brasil. Despite being a Brazilian institution, the bank maintains operational and financial ties to the international system, which could lead to certain services being restricted to avoid fines.

The leader of the campaign for the passage of the Magnitsky Act, Bill Browder, criticized the sanction against Moraes, calling it a "shameful moment" and stating the judge does not fit the criteria for such a measure, and claimed that the situation is the "first clear abuse" of Magnitsky. Browder argued Trump was attempting to address domestic political issues through legislation, while ignoring that the Magnitsky Act was meant to punish human rights abuses. Transparency International also criticized the application of the Magnitsky Act to Moraes, calling it "alarming and unacceptable", viewing it as politically motivated and warning of the risk of institutional instability in Brazil due to such "interference by a foreign government" that disrespects "national sovereignty and the separation of powers". The American non-governmental organization Human Rights First stated the enforcement of the Magnitsky Act shows Trump is seeking "impunity for close political allies"; according to a senior director of the organization, Trump would be willing to start a trade war and other "extreme" measures to protect Bolsonaro from proceedings related to the 8 January coup d'état attempt.

British magazine The Economist criticized the American decision, stating they were overreacting and highlighting the unprecedented nature of applying the Magnitsky Act in this case, arguing that it could backfire. According to the article, the measure would strengthen Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's narrative that Bolsonaro and his allies are "traitors" to the nation. The Economist also noted Moraes acts within Brazilian law and portrayed the justice as "unshakable" in the face of pressure—having flown to São Paulo to watch a match of his team on the very same day the sanctions were announced. According to Fundação Getulio Vargas researcher and Ibmec professor Leonardo Paz Neves, the sanction against Moraes was a strategy by Trump to once again avoid the expression "Trump Always Chickens Out", since on the same day a decree was published listing nearly 700 items exempted from the tariff hike on Brazilian goods.

On 1 August, during the reopening session of the Supreme Federal Court, Moraes declared the Magnitsky Act would be ignored in his case and that he would remain the rapporteur of the criminal case regarding the coup d'état attempt in Brazil. Justices Luís Roberto Barroso and Gilmar Mendes also criticized the sanction and defended their colleague. Moraes stated that "pseudo-patriotic Brazilians" act "in a cowardly and treacherous manner" with the aim of subjecting the functioning of the Supreme Court "to the scrutiny of a foreign state", adding that these individuals "think they are dealing with people of their own kind, also militia members". On 4 August, justice Edson Fachin declared the application of the Magnitsky Act represents "undue interference" and a "threat" to judicial independence.

In an interview to The Washington Post, Moraes said: "we'll do what's right" and expressed his admiration for the constitutional history of the United States, but remained firm in upholding judicial decisions. He defends the legitimacy of his actions, stating that there is no need for adjustments in his conduct or in the way he carries out his work, and argued that the "accelerated pace of certain processes", such as the criminal action involving the coup plot, is justified by the presence of defendants in prison.

On 28 August, The Economist praised the Brazilian judiciary's performance in the Jair Bolsonaro case and highlighted the Donald Trump administration's numerous recent actions against Brazil in an attempt to free the "Trump of the Tropics" (Bolsonaro) from prosecution. Among the actions against the country, the newspaper highlighted the imposition of 50% tariffs on Brazilian products and the application of the Magnitsky Act against Minister Alexandre de Moraes. It concluded:

"Brazil offers a lesson in democracy for an America that is becoming more corrupt, protectionist, and authoritarian. [...] This recalls an ugly bygone era when the United States habitually destabilised Latin American countries. Fortunately, Mr Trump's interference is likely to backfire. [...] Unlike their counterparts in the United States, many of Brazil's mainstream politicians from all parties want to play by the rules and make progress through reform. Those are the hallmarks of political maturity. Temporarily at least, the role of the Western hemisphere's democratic adult has moved south."

On 12 December 2025, the US government lifted the sanctions it placed on Moraes and his wife.

Relationship with Daniel Vorcaro

In September 2026, information was released concerning the relationship between Supreme Federal Court (STF) Justice Alexandre de Moraes and banker Daniel Vorcaro, then the controlling shareholder of Banco Master. The information came primarily from the analysis by the Federal Police (PF) of data extracted from mobile phones seized from Vorcaro as part of Operation Compliance Zero, which was investigating suspected fraud involving the bank. On September 1, Justice André Mendonça, the rapporteur of proceedings related to the case before the STF, ordered the lifting of the confidentiality of a police report containing messages, records of meetings, document metadata and other material concerning Vorcaro's relations with public officials.

According to the report, contact between Vorcaro and Moraes began in late 2023 after former Communications Minister Fábio Faria provided the banker with Moraes's telephone number. The PF identified at least six meetings between them in 2024 and 2025.

Some of the recovered messages record contacts between Vorcaro and an interlocutor identified by the PF as Moraes during the period preceding Vorcaro's arrest in November 2025. On October 30, Vorcaro reportedly asked that the director-general of the Federal Police, Andrei Rodrigues, and the Attorney General of the Republic, Paulo Gonet, be contacted because of the investigations involving Banco Master. On November 15, two days before his arrest, he reportedly asked whether he should leave the country. The PF stated, however, that it was able to recover messages sent by Vorcaro but not any replies from Moraes, because the communications had been forwarded as screenshots of notes through WhatsApp's view-once feature, making it difficult to recover their contents from Vorcaro's device.

The report also recorded messages concerning the organization of legal events in London sponsored or organized by Vorcaro. In one of them, the banker stated that the guest list should be approved in advance by Moraes, while in another he referred to the participation of lawyer Viviane Barci de Moraes, the justice's wife, in changes to the program. The information also concerned the hiring of Barci de Moraes's law firm by Banco Master. The contract, signed in 2024, provided for monthly payments of R$3.5 million, totaling approximately R$129 million over three years. According to the firm, the services were provided between February 2024 and November 2025, during which 94 working meetings were held and legal opinions were prepared.

According to the PF's analysis, metadata from the electronic version of the contract indicated that one of its final modifications was made on January 15, 2024, by a user identified as "Ministro Alexandre de Moraes". The law firm confirmed that Moraes had access to the document, but stated that its compliance department had consulted him, in his capacity as the managing partner's husband, to determine whether there were any legal impediments to the hiring. According to the firm, there was no provision for Moraes to act in proceedings involving Banco Master and the services were actually performed. The PF also found documents relating to a second proposed contract involving a company linked to Vorcaro and Viviane's law firm, worth up to R$50 million. The document provided, among other conditions, for the transfer of interests related to an airplane and a helicopter. The law firm stated that the proposal was not accepted and that it did not replace the original contract.

The new information was released following a controversy in March 2026, when screenshots were published that allegedly indicated a conversation between Vorcaro and Moraes on the day of the banker's first arrest, November 17, 2025. Moraes denied having had that conversation, and the STF stated, based on an analysis of the data then presented, that the messages were associated with other contacts in Vorcaro's address book rather than with the justice's telephone. The material released in September included additional elements, such as messages preceding the arrest, records of meetings and document metadata; however, the replies attributed to Moraes were not included in the material recovered by the PF.

The release of the report raised questions about Moraes's relationship with Vorcaro and about a possible conflict between that relationship, the hiring of his wife's law firm and the impartiality requirements applicable to judicial office. The disclosed material nevertheless remained subject to investigation and institutional controversy and did not, by itself, constitute definitive evidence of unlawful interference by Moraes in the investigations into Banco Master or of criminal conduct.

On September 1, Attorney General of the Republic Paulo Gonet argued that the proceedings that resulted in the PF report should be declared null, while Mendonça argued that the matter should be submitted to the STF plenary. Gonet argued that Mendonça could not, without prior action by the Public Prosecutor's Office or authorization from the STF plenary, order investigative measures aimed at investigating another justice of the Court, stating that "a judge cannot accuse, much less conduct pre-trial investigations".

The Attorney General's Office also argued that an investigative order directed at specific public officials, without a request from the Public Prosecutor's Office or an initiative by the PF, would be invalid because it exceeded judicial authority during the pre-trial stage. The position was taken despite the report also containing references to Gonet and members of his family circle, including references to his participation in an event in London sponsored by Banco Master. Gonet requested that the entire proceeding be declared null, rather than only the elements concerning him. Mendonça, in turn, referred the matter to STF president Edson Fachin for consideration by the full court. On September 2, Fachin stated that the high authority held by the justices imposed "duties, limits and responsibilities" and that he would take the appropriate institutional measures in light of the facts.

On September 1, 2026, Senator Damares Alves announced that she would seek to organize a shutdown of the Federal Senate, seeking the support of other senators so that no votes would be held in the chamber until requests for the impeachment of Justice Alexandre de Moraes were placed on the agenda. Newspapers including O Estado de S. Paulo, O Globo and Folha de S.Paulo published editorials between September 1 and 2 calling for Moraes to leave the Supreme Federal Court, whether through resignation, removal by the STF plenary or impeachment proceedings in the Federal Senate.