[13415]

I'm terribly sorry but nothing in your lengthy reply convinces me that you know more about Brazilian constitutional law than the Brazilian Supreme Court judges. You seem to have some kind of political agenda, the topic is clearly moving you personally, and this is all very fine, but all you present in terms of knowledge of Brazilian constitutional law are other HN comments and unsupported claims that I'm supposed to take for granted.

So I stand with my original comment.

[matheusmoreira]

Unsupported? We literally cited the words from the constitution...

Your comment is further proof that this country doesn't have actual laws. Whatever this judge decides is law. Because he's the ultimate dictator, the ultimate authority. Doesn't matter how much I write, doesn't matter what references I cite, it won't convince you because I'm not a judge. Doesn't matter what the literal words written onto the constitution say, he gets to "selectively and creatively" interpret them and nobody questions it because he's a judge.

I'll cite the judges themselves then. Just yesterday one of then made news when he spoke of "recivilizing the country" and "ending the fake news inquiry headed by Moraes" which led to Twitter's ban. This is the same supposedly impartial judge who went to public events to showboat about having personally defeated an entire political party.

Interesting choice of words. The judge thinks this country is not civilized. Just like me.

The problem is that civilizing it requires their resignation and the passage of laws severely limiting their powers. That's the most peaceful path to civilization. We can't go back to the way things were: citizens blissfully unaware of the fact that the judiciary could instantly usurp all power in a second if they wanted to.

[13415]

A Supreme Court is a political organ that delivers the final legally binding interpretation of a country's constitution. It's an integral part of the power division needed to keep a democracy working. Just disagreeing with a Supreme Court ruling is pretty much meaningless, people disagree with court rulings all the time. There is no problem with that at all.

People sometimes erroneously believe that Supreme Courts primarily have a legal function. That's not true, that's the purpose of the highest instances of ordinary courts. A Supreme Court is called when there are doubts if the highest legal instance has judged according to the constitution. That's why they are political organs and Supreme Court judges are appointed by a political process.