Brazil's Supreme Court justices agree to make social media companies liable for user content
By MAURICIO SAVARESE and ELÉONORE HUGHES
The majority of justices on Brazil's Supreme Court have agreed to make social media companies liable for illegal postings by their users, in a landmark case for Latin America with implications for U.S. relations.
Brazil's top court decided to rule on two different cases to reach an understanding on how to deal with social media companies as reports of fraud, child pornography and violence among teenagers become rampant online. Critics warn such measures could threaten free speech as platforms preemptively remove content that could be problematic.
Gilmar Mendes on Wednesday became the sixth of the court's 11 justices to vote to open a path for companies like Meta, X and Microsoft to be sued and pay fines for content published by their users. Voting is ongoing but a simple majority is all that is needed for the measure to pass.
The ruling will come after U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned of possible visa restrictions against foreign officials allegedly involved in censoring American citizens. One such official reportedly is Brazilian Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who has taken measures against social media outlets he deemed to have not complied with Brazilian law.
The only dissenting Brazilian justice so far is André Mendonça and his vote was made public last week. The court is yet to decide how such regulations will be enacted.
Mendonça said free speech on social media is key for the publication of information that "holds powerful public institutions to account, including governments, political elites and digital platforms.'
Justice Flávio Dino, the first to vote on Wednesday, reminded his colleagues that recent cases of school shootings in Brazil were stimulated on social media. He read out postings by one user who said he was happy by watching families of dead children 'weeping, bleeding, dying.'
'I think social media has not made humanity closer to what it has produced in best fashion,' he said.
The social media proposal would become law once voting is finished and the result is published. But Brazil's Congress could still pass another law to reverse the measure.
The current legislation states social media companies can only be held responsible if they do not remove hazardous content after a court order.
Public debate on regulating social networks increased in Brazil in the aftermath of the Jan. 8 riot in 2023, when supporters of former president Jair Bolsonaro ransacked Congress, the presidential palace and the Supreme Court in the capital, Brasilia.
Platforms need to be pro-active in regulating content, said Alvaro Palma de Jorge, a law professor at the Rio-based Getulio Vargas Foundation, a think tank and university.
'They need to adopt certain precautions that are not compatible with simply waiting for a judge to eventually issue a decision ordering the removal of that content,' Palma de Jorge said.
Wednesday's ruling brings Brazil's approach to big tech closer to the European Union's approach, which has sought to rein in the power of social media companies and other digital platforms.
Rendering platforms automatically accountable for content on their platforms may infringe freedom of speech as they could resort to preemptively removing content, according to the Sao-Paulo based Brazilian Chamber of Digital Economy, an organization that represents sectors of the digital economy.
'This type of liability favors large companies with robust legal structures, to the detriment of smaller, national players, which negatively impacts competition,' said the organization, adding that the decision may increase barriers to innovation.
© Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Mainichi
12 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Brazil hosts BRICS summit, eager to avoid provoking Trump's ire
RIO DE JANEIRO (AP) -- Brazil will play host to a summit of the BRICS bloc of developing economies Sunday and Monday during which pressing topics like Israel's attack on Iran, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and trade tariffs imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump are expected to be handled with caution. Analysts and diplomats said the lack of cohesion in an enlarged BRICS, which doubled in size last year, may affect its ability to become another pole in world affairs. They also see the summit's moderate agenda as an attempt by member countries to stay off Trump's radar. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva will have some of his priorities, such as debates on artificial intelligence and climate change, front and center for the talks with key leaders not in attendance. China's President Xi Jinping won't attend a BRICS summit for the first time since he became his country's leader in 2012. Russian President Vladimir Putin, who will make an appearance via videoconference, continues to mostly avoid traveling abroad due to an international arrest warrant issued after Russia invaded Ukraine. Debate over language on hot-button topics The restraint expected in Rio de Janeiro marks a departure from last year's summit hosted by Russia in Kazan, when the Kremlin sought to develop alternatives to U.S.-dominated payment systems which would allow it to dodge Western sanctions imposed after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. A source involved in the negotiations told journalists Friday that some members of the group want more aggressive language on the situation in Gaza and Israel's attack on Iran. The source spoke under the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about the matter publicly. "Brazil wants to keep the summit as technical as possible," said Oliver Stuenkel, a professor at the Getulio Vargas Foundation think tank and university. Consequently, observers expect a vague final declaration regarding Russia's war in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East. As well as suiting Brazil, a watered-down and non-controversial statement may be made easier by the absences of Putin and Xi, Stuenkel said. Those two countries have pushed for a stronger anti-Western stance, as opposed to Brazil and India that prefer non-alignment. A Brazilian government official told The Associated Press Thursday that the group is expected to produce three joint statements and a final declaration, "all of which less bounded by current geopolitical tensions." The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the summit's preparations. Joao Alfredo Nyegray, an international business and geopolitics professor at the Pontifical Catholic University in Parana, said the summit could have played a role in showing an alternative to an unstable world, but won't do so. "The withdrawal of Egypt's President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and the uncertainty about the level of representation for countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are confirming the difficulty for the BRICS to establish themselves as a cohesive pole of global leadership," Nyegray said. "This moment demands high level articulation, but we are actually seeing dispersion." Brazil skittish in light of Trump tariffs Brazil, the country that chairs the bloc, has picked six strategic priorities for the summit: global cooperation in healthcare; trade, investment and finance; climate change; governance for artificial intelligence; peace-making and security; and institutional development. It has decided to focus on less controversial issues, such as promoting trade relations between members and global health, after Trump returned to the White House, said Ana Garcia, a professor at the Rio de Janeiro Federal Rural University. "Brazil wants the least amount of damage possible and to avoid drawing the attention of the Trump administration to prevent any type of risk to the Brazilian economy," Garcia said. While Brazil will continue to advocate for the reform of Western-led global institutions, a cornerstone policy of the group, the country wants to avoid becoming the target of tariffs -- a predicament it has so far largely escaped. Trump has threatened to impose 100% tariffs against the bloc if they take any moves to undermine the dollar. Other leaders shun the summit Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Egypt's Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi will also be absent. Those two countries joined the BRICS in 2024, alongside Ethiopia, Indonesia and the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia has been invited and is participating in member discussions, but it has yet to send its confirmation letter. As well as new members, the bloc has 10 strategic partner countries, a category created at last year's summit that includes Belarus, Cuba and Vietnam. That rapid expansion led Brazil to put housekeeping issues -- officially termed institutional development -- on the agenda to better integrate new members and boost internal cohesion. Despite notable absences, the summit is important for attendees, especially in the context of instability provoked by Trump's tariff wars, said Bruce Scheidl, a researcher at the University of Sao Paulo's BRICS study group. "The summit offers the best opportunity for emerging countries to respond, in the sense of seeking alternatives and diversifying their economic partnerships," Scheidl said. For Lula, the summit will be a welcome pause from a difficult domestic scenario, marked by a drop in popularity and conflict with Congress. The meeting also represents an opportunity to advance climate negotiations and commitments on protecting the environment before November's COP 30 climate talks in the Amazonian city of Belem.
The Mainichi
15 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Pope Leo XIV signals continuity on fighting abuse with new head of child protection board
ROME (AP) -- Pope Leo XIV signaled commitment to continuing the fight against clergy sexual abuse by appointing France's Bishop Thibault Verny to head the Vatican's child protection advisory commission on Saturday. Verny, 59, replaces American Cardinal Sean O'Malley, the retired archbishop of Boston. O'Malley was the founding president of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, an advisory group Pope Francis established in 2014 to advise the church on best practices to fight abuse and protect children. As the abuse scandal spread globally during Francis' 12-year pontificate, the commission initially lost influence and its crowning recommendation -- the creation of a tribunal to judge bishops who covered up for predator priests -- went nowhere. After many years of reform and new members, it has become a place where victims can go to be heard and bishops can get advice on crafting guidelines to fight abuse. Verny, who is currently the bishop of Chambery, France, has been a member of the commission since 2022 and heads the child protection council of the bishops conference in France, where the church has been rocked by revelations of decades and abuse by priests and bishops. He was among commission members who met with Leo last month. The bishop has been responsible for doing an annual audit of the French church's centers for receiving victims, an initiative that was started after a devastating 2021 report into the French scandal estimated 330,000 children in France had been sexually abused over the past 70 years by church personnel. Cardinal O'Malley praised the appointment, saying Verny has developed in-depth experience helping victims and working with law enforcement and civil authorities to ensure accountability "for the serious failures of the church in France." In a statement, O'Malley also praised Leo for continuing to consider the commission a priority. "The Holy Father's words and deeds in these early months of his pontificate assure the world that the Church will not grow complacent in her efforts to as best possible ensure the protection of children, vulnerable adults and all people in our communities," he said. Verny, for his part, praised O'Malley's leadership as courageous and having served as "a moral compass" for the church, a reference to O'Malley's occasional statements of outrage when even Francis bungled an abuse case. "I am committed, together with the members and personnel, to building on that legacy," Verny said in a statement. The American-born pope made the appointment the day before heading for a six-week vacation at the papal summer retreat south of Rome.
The Mainichi
15 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Trump branded, browbeat and prevailed. But his big bill may come at a political cost
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Barack Obama had the Affordable Care Act. Joe Biden had the Inflation Reduction Act. President Donald Trump will have the tax cuts. All were hailed in the moment and became ripe political targets in campaigns that followed. In Trump's case, the tax cuts may almost become lost in the debates over other parts of the multitrillion-dollar bill that Democrats say will force poor Americans off their health care and overturn a decade or more of energy policy. Through persuasion and browbeating, Trump forced nearly all congressional Republicans to line up behind his marquee legislation despite some of its unpalatable pieces. He followed the playbook that had marked his life in business before politics. He focused on branding -- labeling the legislation the "One Big, Beautiful Bill" -- then relentlessly pushed to strong-arm it through Congress, solely on the votes of Republicans. But Trump's victory will soon be tested during the 2026 midterm elections where Democrats plan to run on a durable theme: that the Republican president favors the rich on tax cuts over poorer people who will lose their health care. Trump and Republicans argue that those who deserve coverage will retain it. Nonpartisan analysts, however, project significant increases to the number of uninsured. Meanwhile, the GOP's promise that the bill will turbocharge the economy will be tested at a time of uncertainty and trade turmoil. Trump has tried to counter the notion of favoring the rich with provisions that would reduce the taxes for people paid in tips and receiving overtime pay, two kinds of earners who represent a small share of the workforce. Extending the tax cuts from Trump's first term that were set to expire if Congress failed to act meant he could also argue that millions of people would avoid a tax increase. To enact that and other expensive priorities, Republicans made steep cuts to Medicaid that ultimately belied Trump's promise that those on government entitlement programs "won't be affected." "The biggest thing is, he's answering the call of the forgotten people. That's why his No. 1 request was the no tax on tips, the no tax on overtime, tax relief for seniors," said Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee. "I think that's going to be the big impact." Hard to reap the rewards Presidents have seen their signature legislative accomplishments unraveled by their successors or become a significant political liability for their party in subsequent elections. A central case for Biden's reelection was that the public would reward the Democrat for his legislative accomplishments. That never bore fruit as he struggled to improve his poll numbers driven down by concerns about his age and stubborn inflation. Since taking office in January, Trump has acted to gut tax breaks meant to boost clean energy initiatives that were part of Biden's landmark health care-and-climate bill. Obama's health overhaul, which the Democrat signed into law in March 2010, led to a political bloodbath in the midterms that fall. Its popularity only became potent when Republicans tried to repeal it in 2017. Whatever political boost Trump may have gotten from his first-term tax cuts in 2017 did not help him in the 2018 midterms, when Democrats regained control of the House, or in 2020 when he lost to Biden. "I don't think there's much if any evidence from recent or even not-so-recent history of the president's party passing a big one-party bill and getting rewarded for it," said Kyle Kondik, an elections analyst with the nonpartisan University of Virginia's Center for Politics. Social net setbacks Democrats hope they can translate their policy losses into political gains. During an Oval Office appearance in January, Trump pledged he would "love and cherish Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid." "We're not going to do anything with that, other than if we can find some abuse or waste, we'll do something," Trump said. "But the people won't be affected. It will only be more effective and better." That promise is far removed from what Trump and the Republican Party ultimately chose to do, paring back not only Medicaid but also food assistance for the poor to make the math work on their sweeping bill. It would force 11.8 million more people to become uninsured by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office, whose estimates the GOP has dismissed. "In Trump's first term, Democrats in Congress prevented bad outcomes. They didn't repeal the (Affordable Care Act), and we did COVID relief together. This time is different," said Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii. "Hospitals will close, people will die, the cost of electricity will go up, and people will go without food." Some unhappy Republicans Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., repeatedly argued the legislation would lead to drastic coverage losses in his home state and others, leaving them vulnerable to political attacks similar to what Democrats faced after they enacted "Obamacare." With his warnings unheeded, Tillis announced he would not run for reelection, after he opposed advancing the bill and enduring Trump's criticism. "If there is a political dimension to this, it is the extraordinary impact that you're going to have in states like California, blue states with red districts," Tillis said. "The narrative is going to be overwhelmingly negative in states like California, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey." Even Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who eventually became the decisive vote in the Senate that ensured the bill's passage, said the legislation needed more work and she urged the House to revise it. Lawmakers there did not. Early polling suggests that Trump's bill is deeply unpopular, including among independents and a healthy share of Republicans. White House officials said their own research does not reflect that. So far, it's only Republicans celebrating the victory. That seems OK with the president. In a speech in Iowa after the bill passed, he said Democrats only opposed it because they "hated Trump." That didn't bother him, he said, "because I hate them, too."
