➡️ The lawsuit challenges confidential orders issued by Moraes to remove user accounts and impose restrictions on the company’s operations, which, according to the plaintiffs, violate rights protected by the U.S. Constitution. The case also involves Truth Social, the social network operated by Trump Media, whose technological infrastructure relies on Rumble’s cloud services.

➡️ Rumble’s attorney, Martin De Luca, stated that “the decision allows the case to move forward and brings us one step closer to protecting Americans’ First Amendment rights against foreign censorship.” The lawyer also added that “Moraes must now respond in an American court or face a default judgment.”

Since February 2025, Brazilian authorities have been claiming they were ready to defend Justice Alexandre de Moraes in the Rumble/Trump Media case in the United States.

The AGU said it would act, that it was coordinating with U.S. counsel and preparing filings. Then the case advanced for 460 days and nobody showed up in court.

Instead, Brazil’s institutions went to extraordinary lengths to successfully prevent ordinary service of process through the Hague Convention. And now, after a U.S. federal judge authorized email service, a collection of Brazilian authorities are suddenly calling this a diplomatic crisis.

Why did it have to come to this?

If Brazil’s position is that Justice Moraes acted lawfully, within his authority, and in compliance with both U.S. and Brazilian law, as well as international treaties, the path is simply to appear in U.S. court and say so.

What is harder to explain is why announce for fifteen months that Brazil would defend Moraes, then decline to appear when the defense was actually required, and now treat a court authorized summons as an international diplomatic incident?

Helpful timeline of the facts

Brazilian outlets reported as early as February 21, 2025 that the AGU would defend Moraes in the Rumble/Trump Media case. A few days later, on February 25, 2025, the AGU itself published that it “will act” in the case and that the defense would be handled in partnership with an international law firm authorized to practice before U.S. courts. It also said that, at the STF’s request, AGU had already begun arrangements for legal action.https://www.gp1.com.br/brasil/noticia/2025/2/21/agu-vai-defender-moraes-em-acao-movida-por-trump-nos-eua-588360.html

Then, on June 6, 2025, UOL reported that AGU had instructed its office in the United States to monitor the new Rumble/Trump Media process and that the AGU “should present a formal manifestation to the American court if the process advances.”
https://noticias.uol.com.br/politica/ultimas-noticias/2025/06/06/governo-aciona-escritorio-nos-eua-apos-nova-acao-contra-moraes.htm

On July 8, 2025, SBT reported that AGU was preparing “defense drafts” in case it decided to act officially on behalf of Brazil, and noted that once Moraes was officially notified he would have 21 days to respond or seek dismissal.
https://sbtnews.sbt.com.br/noticia/politica/agu-acompanha-processo-de-empresas-dos-eua-contra-moraes-e-prepara-possivel-defesa

Yesterday, it was widely reported that the STF is now discussing with AGU, the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs how to react to the email service, including possible diplomatic instruments. https://www.novojornal.com.br/stf-busca-solucao-juridica-para-responder-notificacao-americana-enviada-a-moraes/