In a move to heighten diplomatic tensions between the United States and Brazil, two Republican lawmakers have called on President Donald Trump to impose severe sanctions on Supreme Court Justice Alexander de Mora. The request, made on Thursday (March 20), represents a major escalation in an international confrontation that is turning into questions of digital sovereignty, freedom of expression and jurisdiction.
Representatives Maria Elvira Salazar and Rich McCromic, both Republicans, are calling for the Magnitsky Act — a powerful legal tool rarely used against officials in Democratic-allied states — to be used. The request comes as a number of close associates of President Trump, particularly entrepreneur Elon Musk, have proposed similar measures against the Brazilian judge.
What’s at stake: The message comes from Republican representatives
The message sent by Republican lawmakers does not save their rhetoric against the Brazilian minister. According to the distributors, Alexander de Mora “is not only a problem for Brazil,” but will also represent a “growing threat to the United States.”
Based on this description, members of Congress are calling for immediate action, including a visa ban and economic sanctions, against the judge. This position goes beyond diplomatic issues alone, as it directly affects the powers of a sovereign country’s relations, which can usually be attributed to authoritarian regimes with a history of systematic human rights violations.
Magnitsky’s Law: The Original Origin and Purpose
Magnitsky has a history that dates back to the administration of President Barack Obama, as it was passed with bipartisan support in the U.S. Congress. Its name is derived from Russian tax lawyer Sergey Magnitsky, who died in prison in 2009 after investigating an estimated $230 million scheme involving Russian officials.
The law was originally intended as a way to punish foreign officials responsible for serious human rights violations, particularly in contexts where there was no possibility of justice in the individuals’ home countries.
Expansion of universal law: Magnitsky Law
In 2016, the scope of the law was significantly expanded with the passage of the Maganeski Global Human Rights Accountability Act, which greatly expanded the ability of U.S. sanctions to cover public officials from any country in the world. This expanded version states that “the President may impose sanctions … with respect to a foreign person designated by the President, based on credible evidence,” who has committed human rights violations.
This broad discretionary authority granted to the American president is precisely what is being referred to in the case of the Brazilian minister.
Elon Musk’s role in the controversies
It is impossible to analyze the current situation without taking into account the central role that Elon Musk played in this conflict.
The billionaire, who has a close relationship with President Trump and wields great influence in his administration, has already proposed applying sanctions against Minister Alexander de Morris.
Musk’s active involvement in this controversial matter reveals an additional dimension to the conflict over the control and organization of digital platforms in Brazil. The Brazilian minister’s decisions regarding X (Twitter), a company owned by Musk, clearly contributed to the intensification of this conflict.
The impact of possible penalties
If President Trump decides to accept the request of a member of Congress, the consequences for Minister Alexander de Mora will be great.
The sanctions stipulated in the Magnitsky Act include the freezing of assets or financial assets in the United States, as well as a ban on entry into American territory. More than the practical impact of these measures, the symbolic meaning will be profound: the Supreme Court justice will receive the same treatment as authoritarians with a history of serious human rights violations.
Criminal proceedings against the Brazilian minister
According to the penalties, Minister Alexander de Mora will participate in practices that violate human rights and would increase censorship, especially from an American perspective, a violation of the United States.
This last claim may refer to the minister’s decisions that influenced the operations of American technology companies on Brazilian soil, including the condition of compliance with Brazilian Court orders and the removal of content from a platform.
The diplomatic precedents and consequences
The application of the Magnitsky Act against the Supreme Court Justice will be an unprecedented democratic ally in recent diplomatic history.
Traditionally, this tool has been used by national authorities with authoritarian or quasi-authoritarian regimes, as systematic human rights violations occur without the possibility of domestic accountability. The use of this mechanism against Brazil could set a major diplomatic precedent and impact relations between the two countries in a range of areas, from security cooperation to trade agreements.
Conclusion: A crucial moment for relations between Brazil and the European Union
Republican members of Congress are urging President Trump to consider a resolution that could largely restore relations between Brazil and the United States.
On the one hand, meeting this demand would indicate compliance with Elon Musk and other Brazilian ministerial decisions. On the other hand, it could undermine relations with an important partner in the Americas and set an interventionist precedent in sovereign jurisdictional matters. How this situation develops in the coming days will be very important to understand the new trend in US foreign policy under the Trump administration towards Brazil and Latin America as a whole.
Ultimately, this controversy transcends the specific status of the minister, Alexander de Mora, who interprets the fundamental questions of national sovereignty, the global digital state, and the limits of American power in an increasingly interconnected world.
