The U.S. State Department set aside US$1 million for a project called "Countering Lawfare and Censorship in Brazil," three days before Brazilians vote in the first round of a general election on Sunday, 4 October. The money would support civil-society groups opposing what the project describes as judicial overreach and censorship by the Supreme Federal Court (STF), the country's highest court. The Guardian reported the allocation on Wednesday, 30 September, citing State Department documents and sources. G1 and Agência Brasil carried the story on Thursday.
The timing matters. Quaest's latest runoff poll, released Monday, puts President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Flávio Bolsonaro at 42% each. Datafolha's last survey, on 24 September, put Lula at 47% and Flávio at 45%, within the margin of error. The candidates are running neck and neck.
Money Aimed at Brazil's Highest Court
At the 1 October exchange rate of R$5.20 per U.S. dollar, the grant comes to about R$5.2 million. That's a currency conversion, not another payment. The award is one of 43 grants totaling US$176.9 million from the Human Rights and Democracy Fund, which the U.S. Congress funds for democracy and rights work abroad. The largest reported award is US$40 million for a consortium led by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation. Another grant, for US$5 million, would support a British group campaigning against online-safety and hate-speech laws. Brazil's share falls well below 1% of the package.
Key details remain unknown. No recipient groups for the Brazil project have been identified, and no payment has been confirmed. Agência Brasil said it had no information on whether the money had been transferred or merely committed. The State Department didn't comment on particular grants. It told The Guardian the programmes were under "active deliberation" and would go through vetting, and that recipients would need to follow federal grant rules.
A Democratic congressional aide offered The Guardian a more disputed version of events. Senator Jeanne Shaheen, the aide said, had placed holds on US$22 million in grants, including funding for Brazil, South Africa, Nigeria and right-wing causes in Britain and Europe. Secretary of State Marco Rubio then personally signed a memo lifting the holds. That account came from one source and hasn't been independently verified.
Attorney General's Office head Jorge Messias responded on 1 October. He called the report a warning for Brazilian sovereignty and said foreign political interests must not meddle in Brazil's institutions or voters' choices. The STF didn't respond to Agência Brasil before publication, and the foreign ministry hadn't commented in the reports reviewed.
A Court Under Pressure at Home
Pressure on the court is also growing within Brazil. A CNN Brasil survey counted at least 84 proposed constitutional amendments targeting it: 64 in the Chamber of Deputies and 20 in the Senate. Most proposals predate the Banco Master banking scandal, while the oldest pending measure dates to 2005. The newest, filed on 2 September 2026 by Senator Zequinha Marinho of the Podemos party, would bar former justices from elected office for five years.
The proposal furthest along, PEC 8/2021, would stop individual justices from suspending laws or acts of the president and Congress. The Senate approved it on 22 November 2023 by 52 votes to 18 in both rounds. The Chamber's constitution and justice committee backed it on 9 October 2024 by 39 votes to 18. It still needs a special committee and two floor votes. An amendment needs three-fifths of each chamber: 308 of 513 deputies and 49 of 81 senators. Congress promulgates it without the president's signature, so there's no veto.
The court's critics haven't been idle. Nor has the STF: it convicted Jair Bolsonaro of plotting a coup and sentenced him to 27 years in prison. Washington later targeted the court, Agência Brasil reported. In July 2025, it sanctioned Justice Alexandre de Moraes after lobbying by Eduardo Bolsonaro, the former president's son. CNN Brasil reported that the sanctions were lifted in December 2025. Friction continues over STF rulings restricting American digital platforms, which the court says target online crime.
A separate case at the Superior Electoral Court illustrates the stakes of online falsehoods. On Wednesday, the court began hearing a dispute over false posts claiming Flávio would strip Our Lady of Aparecida, Brazil's patron saint, of her title. It formed a majority to keep offline posts that directly connect Flávio or his family to the claim.
The Moraes Questions
Moraes faces scrutiny over Banco Master, a lender the Central Bank shut down in November 2025. The Federal Police detained controlling shareholder Daniel Vorcaro in a fraud investigation, Reuters reported. On Sunday, 20 September 2026, O Globo columnist Lauro Jardim published video showing Moraes and his wife stepping off a business jet at Rio de Janeiro's Santos Dumont airport on 22 August 2025. Poder360 reported the Legacy 650 belongs to a company in which a fund linked to Vorcaro held a stake.
Moraes's office called the insinuations "absolutely false." It said he "never travelled on any Daniel Vorcaro plane, nor with him or Fabiano Zettel, whom he doesn't even know." No one has claimed Vorcaro or Zettel was aboard. Money Times said the footage contradicted the denial. The dispute centers on whether a jet owned and operated by companies with Vorcaro-linked stakes counts as his plane.
A Federal Police report on Vorcaro's phone includes exchanges police describe as involving Moraes. Correio Braziliense reported messages referring to a R$131 million contract with his wife's firm. Moraes disputes the material's authenticity and context. His defence says police found none of 47 of the 52 notes they analysed in WhatsApp chats. No court or authority has found wrongdoing by Moraes or his wife, and neither has been charged.
Why This Matters:
Brazil's voters face a tied race, a court under open scrutiny and reports that a foreign government is funding groups opposed to it. Each development raises questions about who answers to whom. Justices hold strong individual powers, including urgent solo decisions, and the public is hearing unresolved questions about one of them. Meanwhile, money from abroad, still unconfirmed, would go to unnamed groups targeting the same institution. Reform proposals could reshape the court, and Congress could pass them without a presidential veto. Transparency about the jet flights, the Vorcaro material and any grant recipients would let Brazilians judge for themselves. Until then, trust in both the courts and the election remains exposed.