Feb 6, 2020 - World

Brazilian judge will not proceed with charges against Glenn Greenwald "for now"

Photo: EVARISTO SA/AFP via Getty Images.

The Intercept reported Thursday that a Brazilian judge has declined to move forward with cybercrime charges against its co-founder Glenn Greenwald.

The backdrop: Brazilian prosecutors last month charged Greenwald — best known for publishing leaked documents from whistleblower Edward Snowden about U.S. domestic surveillance — for allegedly spreading cellphone messages that undermined the reputation of a sweeping anti-corruption investigation known as Operation Car Wash.

  • Far-right President Jair Bolsonaro has repeatedly attacked The Intercept and Greenwald personally for their investigative reporting. Greenwald lives in Brazil and is married to Brazilian politician David Miranda, who lost a bid for a Brazilian congressional seat and has labeled himself the "antithesis of Bolsonaro."
  • The Intercept notes that while the judge opted to not further pursue charges, it was "only on account of a previous finding by the Brazilian Supreme Court that The Intercept’s reporting on Operation Car Wash had not transgressed any legal boundaries."

What they're saying: "While I welcome the fact that this investigation will not move forward, this decision is insufficient to guarantee the rights of a free press," Greenwald said in a statement.

  • "The rejection is based on the fact that the supreme court already issued an injunction against attempts of official persecution against me. This is not enough," Greenwald continued.
  • "We seek a decisive rejection from the Supreme Court of this abusive prosecution on the grounds that it is a clear and grave assault on core press freedoms. Anything less would leave open the possibility of further erosion of the fundamental freedom of the press against other journalists."

Go deeper

Justice Sotomayor: Rushing Trump admin's legal challenges "comes at a cost"

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor at Tufts University on Sept. 12 in Boston, Massachusetts. Photo: Paul Marotta/Getty Images

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a dissenting opinion on Friday against the court's 5-4 vote to allow the Trump administration to penalize immigrants likely to rely on public programs like food stamps and Medicaid.

The big picture: The Trump administration has consistently tried to get controversial cases in front of the Supreme Court as quickly as possible, routinely asking the high court to step in before appeals courts have a chance to rule, Axios' Sam Baker reports. Sotomayor is apparently expressing her dissent at this new arrangement as well as the ruling itself.

Supreme Court to hear Philadelphia case over same-sex foster parents

Photo: Daniel Slim/AFP via Getty Images

The Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear a high-profile case that could reshape the bounds of First Amendment protections for religion.

Why it matters: The direct question in this case is whether Philadelphia had the right to cancel a contract with an adoption agency that refused to place foster children with same-sex couples. It also poses bigger questions that could lead the court to overturn a key precedent and carve out new protections for religious organizations.

Brett Kavanaugh's first big abortion case

Kavanaugh at his swearing-in ceremony in 2018. Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The Supreme Court this week will wade into its first big abortion case since Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the bench.

Why it matters: It will give us the clearest indication yet of just how quickly and aggressively the newly expanded conservative majority is likely to move in curtailing abortion rights.