Brazil is preparing to put a woman on trial for words she typed online nearly five years ago, a case that illustrates how speech regulation now functions through judicial interpretation rather than legislation.
Isadora Borges, a resident of Paraíba, is accused of committing the crime of “transphobia” after posting comments on social media in November 2020 about sex, biology, and gender identity.
Her full name is Isadora Borges de Aquino Silva. She is 34 years old, a veterinary student, and is a self-described feminist.
Federal prosecutors argue that those posts warrant criminal prosecution. If convicted on all counts, Borges could receive a prison sentence ranging from four to ten years.
The posts appeared on X, then operating as Twitter, during a period of intense online debate over gender theory. One message stated that “transgender” women “were obviously born male.”
Another said: “A person who identifies as transgender retains their birth DNA. No surgery, synthetic hormone, or clothing change will change this fact…” The remarks were widely shared and circulated beyond Borges’s own account.
After the posts gained traction, a complaint was filed with federal police by Erika Hilton, a politician and transgender woman, who has been central to other similar free speech cases. That complaint initiated a criminal process that remained dormant for years.
Borges learned in September 2025 that prosecutors had formally charged her with two counts of “transphobia,” each carrying a possible sentence of two to five years. Her first court hearing is scheduled for tomorrow, February 10.
She is being represented with the support of ADF International. Julio Pohl, legal counsel for the organization, said the case reflects a deep problem in how Brazil now treats political and social expression. “No one should face a decade behind bars for expressing an opinion on a matter of public concern,” he said, in a press statement sent to Reclaim The Net. “Weaponising Brazil’s expansive ‘transphobia’ laws to punish peaceful expression is a profound violation of freedom of speech.”
Borges has spoken publicly about why she addressed the subject in the first place: “I commented on the issue because I care about the truth and protecting women. No one should ever fear going to prison for recognizing biological reality. I hope that my case can serve as a turning point in fighting censorship in Brazil. Brazilians deserve the freedom to speak openly without punishment.”
Federal prosecutors argue that publishing and amplifying those views constitutes criminal conduct. A conviction would bring fines and incarceration. Even without a guilty verdict, the legal process itself imposes high financial and personal costs.
The charges rely on a legal structure created by Brazil’s pro-censorship Supreme Court rather than by Parliament.
In June 2019, the court voted 8 to 3 to reinterpret an existing anti-racism statute so that it also covered sexual orientation and gender identity. The original law addressed discrimination in areas such as employment, housing, and public accommodations, and also criminalized defamation and insults. Through judicial extension, it now applies to a broader category of speech.
Because no statute passed by Congress defines “transphobia,” prosecutors and judges determine how the concept applies, often years after the speech occurred. That arrangement leaves boundaries undefined and enforcement unpredictable.
