> See the actual order for yourself
Is the first image the actual order? Seems weird for it to say “including that of a sitting Brazilian senator.”
The actual orders are in a following tweet, it seems: https://x.com/AlexandreFiles/status/1829980105567059997
One of those oddities of the current experience there is that you can't see that there's another message in the thread if you're viewing it while not logged in.
I see sigoloso at the top. Would this have been permanently secret? Or is it like a warrant, where it's sealed for a period of time?
It's sealed for a period of time, not a state secret like Top Secret, etc.
They were literally in secret - as in, the orders tell Twitter to comply and to do so in secret. See the actual order for yourself:
https://x.com/AlexandreFiles/status/1829979981130416479
> Would this also ban spam filters? Fraud convictions? If not then there are obviously caveats to when and how one can censor.
It would ban a government spam filter yes. I am not sure how fraud matters here, but I am guessing you’re saying that speech that constitutes fraud can be censored. But this is a lot more basic - the banning of currently sitting elected officials from social media.
> Also, why isn’t Article 220 ¶ 5 the relevant one [1]? Article 5 has 74 sections. Genuine question, I have no knowledge of Brazilian law.
Brazil’s constitution isn’t as well written as some other countries like the US. It is really long and there are many redundant and conflicting sections. Article 220 is in Title 8 (social order). Article 5 is in Title 2 (fundamental rights) and is more important. In article 5, look at 9 or 37 as examples that the actions of Alexandre de Moraes violates.