US Judge Rules Trump Media, Rumble Can Ignore Brazil’s Censorship Orders

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

A federal judge in Florida has ruled that video-sharing platform Rumble and Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG), the parent company of Truth Social, are not required to comply with gag orders issued by a Brazilian Supreme Court justice.

The orders, issued by Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, had demanded the removal of U.S.-based accounts belonging to a prominent supporter of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, in a case raising concerns over international judicial overreach and free speech rights in the United States.

In a Feb. 25 ruling, U.S. District Judge Mary Scriven found that Moraes’s orders were unenforceable in the United States because they were not properly served under international law, including the Hague Convention and the U.S.–Brazil Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty.

“Under well-established law, Plaintiffs are not obligated to comply with the directives and pronouncements, and no one is authorized or obligated to assist in their enforcement against Plaintiffs or their interests here in the United States,” the judge wrote.

However, the judge denied without prejudice a request for a temporary restraining order filed by Rumble and TMTG, ruling that the case is not ripe for judicial review because no enforcement action had been taken against the two companies in the United States. This means the case could be revived if Brazilian authorities or another entity attempt to enforce the orders.

The lawsuit, brought by Rumble and TMTG on Feb. 19, accused Moraes of engaging in illegal censorship by issuing gag orders to suppress the U.S. accounts of a “well-known politically outspoken user” of Rumble, referred to in the complaint as “Political Dissident A,” later identified as Allan dos Santos. A supporter of Bolsonaro and a fugitive in Brazil, Santos is under investigation for allegedly spreading false information and hate speech.

Moraes’s orders required Rumble to suspend Santos’s accounts, block new ones, disclose user data, and appoint a legal representative in Brazil to submit to Brazilian judicial authority. The orders also imposed escalating fines and threatened to shut down Rumble’s operations in Brazil for noncompliance.

In their lawsuit, Rumble and TMTG argue that Moraes’s actions violated constitutional protections of free speech and contravened other U.S. laws, including Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields platforms from legal liability for user-generated content.

“The Gag Orders, as issued, censor legitimate political discourse in the United States, undermining fundamental constitutional protections enshrined in the First Amendment,” the plaintiffs said in the complaint. “Justice Moraes’s extraterritorial demands inflict immediate and irreparable harm on Rumble and TMTG by undermining lawful American political discourse, a right central to free speech under U.S. principles.”

After Rumble and TMTG filed their lawsuit, Moraes issued a demand that Rumble “immediately submit” to his authority or face consequences, according to the complaint. After Rumble failed to comply, Moraes ordered local telecommunications companies to shut it down in Brazil and imposed a daily fine of $8,700 on the U.S.-based company.

The two companies then filed a motion for a temporary restraining order on Feb. 22, warning that allowing foreign officials to bypass U.S. legal protections could set a dangerous precedent.

“If this type of end-run around U.S. law is allowed to stand, it will embolden other foreign officials to impose their censorship regimes on American companies without due process, suppress political discourse, and interfere with U.S. business operations without legal justification,” Rumble and TMTG wrote in the motion.

The Epoch Times reached out to the Brazilian Supreme Court with a request for comment on Scriven’s Feb. 25 ruling but did not receive a response by publication time.

Moraes has previously clashed with tech companies over censorship, most notably ordering a nationwide ban on tech billionaire Elon Musk’s social media platform, X, for refusing to remove certain accounts accused of spreading misinformation and failing to appoint a legal representative in Brazil. The ban was later lifted after X complied with the orders and paid millions of dollars in fines.