Fw: EMERGENCY PRO SE FILING: Petition for TRO, Declaratory Relief & IFP – Joaquim Pedro de Morais Filho v. Google LLC, et al.

---

From: Joaquim Pedro de Morais Filho <pedrodefilho@hotmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 2, 2026 3:31:34 AM
To: Pro Se Filing <pro_se_filing@nysd.uscourts.gov>; prose@nysd.uscourts.gov <prose@nysd.uscourts.gov>
Subject: EMERGENCY PRO SE FILING: Petition for TRO, Declaratory Relief & IFP – Joaquim Pedro de Morais Filho v. Google LLC, et al.

 

I, Joaquim Pedro de Morais Filho, proceeding pro se , respectfully submit this Emergency Petition for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), Preliminary Injunction , and Declaratory Relief against Google LLC , Apple Inc. , Microsoft Corporation , and Meta Platforms, Inc. , alongside a Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. The explicit purpose of this filing in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is to urgently enjoin these U.S.-based technology corporations from executing a retaliatory and unconstitutional foreign gag order issued by the São Paulo State Court in Brazil. This foreign edict unlawfully decrees my "Digital Civil Death" by demanding the complete and cumulative blockade of my U.S.-hosted email accounts and my professional Instagram network. I urgently seek this Court's equitable intervention because enforcing this order on U.S. servers acts as an unconstitutional prior restraint , is fundamentally repugnant to U.S. Public Policy , and constitutes a grotesque, extraterritorial violation of my First Amendment rights, digital due process, and international human rights.

 Copiado!

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

---------------------------------------------------x

JOAQUIM PEDRO DE MORAIS FILHO,

Nationality: Brazilian

Brazilian Passport: GD584268

CPF: 133.036.496-18

Resident and Domiciled in:

Rua Raimundo Mendes de Carvalho, 840, Icaraí

Caucaia, Ceará (CE) - CEP: 61.620-130, Brazil.

Petitioner / Plaintiff (Pro Se),

v.

GOOGLE LLC;

APPLE INC.;

MICROSOFT CORPORATION;

META PLATFORMS, INC. (INSTAGRAM);

Respondents / Defendants.

---------------------------------------------------x

CASE NO.: [To be assigned by the Clerk of Court]

NATURE OF THE ACTION:

1. EMERGENCY PETITION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO) AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
2. DECLARATORY RELIEF AGAINST THE ENFORCEMENT OF A FOREIGN GAG ORDER REPUGNANT TO U.S. PUBLIC POLICY
3. PROTECTION OF FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, DIGITAL DUE PROCESS, AND INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS
4. REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

EXPEDITED REVIEW REQUESTED
(EXTREME URGENCY - EX PARTE)

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF EXTREME URGENCY AND EXCEPTION TO INTERNATIONAL COMITY

This emergency petition invokes the fundamental equitable powers of this United States District Court to halt a grotesque and ongoing extraterritorial violation of international human rights and the First Amendment. The Plaintiff respectfully seeks an immediate Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to enjoin U.S.-based technology corporations (Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Meta) from executing a retaliatory, unconstitutional, and confessedly biased foreign edict issued by the São Paulo State Court (TJSP) in Brazil.

The foreign order at issue unlawfully decrees the Plaintiff's "Digital Civil Death," demanding the complete and cumulative blockade of all his U.S.-hosted email accounts and his professional Instagram network. This Court's intervention is not sought to adjudicate the underlying fabricated criminal merits in Brazil, but rather to block the enforcement of the gag order itself on U.S. servers. The order is irreparably tainted by a blatant lack of due process: the instigating appellate judge explicitly confessed on the record to being the "victim" of the Plaintiff, openly violating the universal legal maxim nemo judex in causa sua (no man shall be a judge in his own cause).

Enforcing such an order is fundamentally repugnant to U.S. Public Policy. Furthermore, this Court must take judicial notice that this is not an isolated incident. The Brazilian judiciary has recently engaged in a globally condemned, systemic campaign of authoritarian overreach against free speech, routinely using gag orders to silence critics, journalists, and citizens—most prominently evidenced by the recent nationwide censorship and banning of platforms like "X" (formerly Twitter). U.S. servers cannot be commandeered to enforce foreign dictatorial retaliation. Given that the foreign order has intentionally annihilated the Plaintiff's digital enterprise and sole source of income, he concurrently submits an urgent request to proceed In Forma Pauperis.

I. INTRODUCTION

1. This Emergency Petition seeks the immediate intervention of the United States Federal Justice system to halt a grotesque violation of fundamental human rights, freedom of speech, and digital due process. The Plaintiff, Joaquim Pedro de Morais Filho, is the target of a brazen campaign of judicial "Lawfare"—the weaponization of the legal system by a foreign state actor to exact personal vengeance, culminating in a draconian decree of "Digital Civil Death."

2. Specifically, on April 1, 2026, a Brazilian Judge of Guarantees (Antonio Balthazar De Matos) ordered the total and cumulative blockade of the Plaintiff's primary means of survival, education, and communication—all hosted on servers owned by U.S. corporations: Google (j360074@gmail.com), Apple (pedrodefilho@icloud.com), Microsoft (pedrodefilho@hotmail.com), and Meta/Instagram (professional account "@Inpiojus"). This staggering extraterritorial overreach acts as an unconstitutional prior restraint, severing the Plaintiff's lifeline to the modern digital world.

3. The Core Issue: This Petition asks this Court to enjoin the U.S.-based Defendants (Google, Apple, Microsoft, Meta) from complying with the foreign takedown order. U.S. courts are not safe havens for the enforcement of foreign vendettas. The underlying order was issued under circumstances that thoroughly "shock the conscience": the instigating appellate judge explicitly confessed on the record to being the "victim" of the Plaintiff, yet adamantly refused to recuse himself. This brazen violation obliterates any presumption of fundamental fairness required for international comity (see Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U.S. 113). To allow U.S. servers to execute an order born of such confessed bias would compel U.S. corporations to become complicit in severe First Amendment violations.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This Court possesses subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Diversity Jurisdiction). The Plaintiff is a citizen of a foreign state (Brazil), and the Defendants are U.S. corporations headquartered or conducting substantial business in the United States. The intrinsic value of the Plaintiff's digital enterprise, communicative rights, and professional standing easily exceeds the statutory threshold of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, given the incalculable destruction of his consulting enterprise and global digital footprint.

5. Furthermore, Federal Question Jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1331) firmly applies. This action seeks declaratory relief (28 U.S.C. § 2201) regarding the unenforceability of a foreign digital edict that directly conflicts with the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution—specifically the heavy presumption against prior restraint—and customary International Human Rights Law.

6. Venue is proper in the Southern District of New York pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391, as the Defendants conduct systematic and continuous business within this district, and NY federal courts regularly adjudicate complex matters regarding international comity and the enforcement limits of foreign censorship edicts.

III. THE CHRONOLOGY OF BIAS: A DOCUMENTED TIMELINE OF JUDICIAL RETALIATION AND USURPATION OF JURISDICTION

7. To pierce the veil of the foreign court's presumed legitimacy, this Honorable Court need only examine the undisputed chronological timeline of events, which provides prima facie evidence that the gag order is the culmination of a personal vendetta by a conflicted state actor.

8. March 2023 – The Genesis of Enmity: Appellate Judge (Desembargador) Hermann Herschander formally registers a criminal complaint against the Plaintiff (Police Report No. IS5123-1/2023), alleging personal offense. At this exact moment, an indisputable, legally binding animosity is established. The Judge is officially the "victim," and the Plaintiff is his "aggressor."

9. Late 2025 to Early 2026 – The Usurpation of Jurisdiction: The Plaintiff files a Habeas Corpus petition (Case No. 0043374-95.2025.8.26.0000). The case is structurally assigned to Judge Herschander. Under any civilized legal system, the Judge had an absolute, non-derogable duty to immediately recuse himself. He willfully failed to do so.

10. March 11, 2026 – The Tainted Judgment: Acting as a judge in his own cause (nemo judex in causa sua), Judge Herschander presides over and rules on the merits of the Plaintiff's Habeas Corpus, denying the Plaintiff's constitutional rights. The "victim" effectively acted as the executioner.

11. March 13, 2026 – The Written Confession of Bias: Facing a formal Exception of Suspicion filed by the Plaintiff, Judge Herschander issues a dispatch where he astonishingly confesses in writing to being the victim in the 2023 police report. However, he offers the legally bankrupt excuse that he "did not realize" the Plaintiff was his former adversary until after the judgment had commenced.

12. April 1, 2026 – The Retaliatory Gag Order (The Act to be Enjoined): Infuriated by the Plaintiff's legitimate attempts to expose this usurpation of power, the Judge's grievance precipitates a new, retaliatory police inquiry (Case No. 1515683-91.2026.8.26.0454). A subordinate Judge of Guarantees then issues the extraterritorial order directly targeting the Defendants (Google, Apple, Microsoft, Meta), commanding the absolute obliteration of the Plaintiff's digital existence.

13. Conclusion on the Chronology: The timeline indisputably proves that the April 1, 2026 order is the "fruit of the poisonous tree." It was birthed from the retaliatory animus of a judge who refused to relinquish power over his personal adversary.

IV. LEGAL ARGUMENTS

A. Refusal of International Comity: Repugnance to U.S. Public Policy

14. While U.S. courts generally respect foreign judgments under the doctrine of International Comity, this respect is completely abrogated when the foreign order is repugnant to U.S. fundamental legal principles (Yahoo!, Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et L'Antisemitisme, 433 F.3d 1199).

15. The foreign order demanding U.S. tech giants to permanently disable a user's communication channels, orchestrated by a judge acting out of personal vendetta, is a blatant violation of Due Process and the First Amendment. U.S. servers cannot be weaponized to enforce dictatorial censorship.

B. The Brazilian Context: A Pattern of Judicial Abuse against Free Speech

16. This Honorable Court must take judicial notice of the current geopolitical climate regarding digital rights in Brazil. The Brazilian judiciary has recently engaged in a globally condemned campaign of systemic overreach against free speech. Recent events involving the complete banning of the "X" (formerly Twitter) platform in Brazil for refusing to comply with secret, unconstitutional censorship orders demonstrate a dangerous pattern of judicial authoritarianism. The Plaintiff is a micro-target of this exact same macro-abuse of power. This represents a severe "chilling effect" on global free speech.

C. Violation of International Human Rights

17. The wholesale blocking of the Plaintiff's emails and social networks violates Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights (Pact of San José), which explicitly prohibit "prior censorship" and the restriction of expression through indirect methods such as the abuse of government controls over communication apparatuses.

V. REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

18. The Plaintiff respectfully requests to proceed In Forma Pauperis (without prepaying fees or costs) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

19. As evidenced by the IFP documentation (dated January 2026) and utility bills previously submitted in related filings, the Plaintiff is currently unemployed, relying on minimal savings and family support for basic survival in Brazil. Furthermore, the very nature of the illegal foreign order—which blocked his professional Instagram ("Inpiojus Consultoria Jurídica")—has deliberately destroyed his ability to generate income. Requiring the payment of filing fees would effectively close the doors of the U.S. Justice system to a victim of state-sponsored financial and digital strangulation.

VI. APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO)

20. Irreparable Harm: Without an immediate TRO, the Plaintiff suffers daily, irreparable harm. He cannot communicate with his university, he cannot service his clients, and he cannot coordinate his legal defense because his emails (Google, Apple, Microsoft) and professional networks (Meta) are blocked. The loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury (Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347).

21. Likelihood of Success on the Merits: The Plaintiff will succeed because U.S. courts consistently refuse to enforce foreign gag orders that amount to prior restraint and violate basic tenets of due process and free speech.

22. Balance of Equities and Public Interest: The Defendants (Tech Companies) suffer zero harm by refusing to enforce an illegal foreign order on U.S. soil. The public interest strongly favors protecting the integrity of U.S.-based communication networks from foreign judicial corruption and censorship.

VII. PRAYERS FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court:

1. GRANT the Plaintiff's application to proceed In Forma Pauperis;

2. ISSUE AN IMMEDIATE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO) and subsequent Preliminary Injunction enjoining the Defendants (Google LLC, Apple Inc., Microsoft Corp., and Meta Platforms, Inc.) from complying with, executing, or enforcing the April 1, 2026, order issued by the Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo (Case No. 1515683-91.2026.8.26.0454) against the Plaintiff's accounts;

3. ORDER the Defendants to immediately restore full access, functionality, and visibility to the Plaintiff's accounts hosted on their U.S. servers, specifically: j360074@gmail.com (Google), pedrodefilho@icloud.com (Apple), pedrodefilho@hotmail.com (Microsoft), and the Instagram account @Inpiojus (Meta);

4. ISSUE A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT stating that the foreign judicial order targeting the Plaintiff's U.S.-hosted communication accounts is repugnant to United States public policy, the First Amendment, and International Human Rights, and is therefore unenforceable against U.S. entities; and

5. Grant such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

DECLARATION UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America (28 U.S.C. § 1746) that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on: April 2, 2026.

New York, NY (via electronic submission) /

Caucaia, Ceará, Brazil.

Respectfully submitted,

JOAQUIM PEDRO DE MORAIS FILHO

Petitioner / Plaintiff (Pro Se)

CPF: 133.036.496-18

Passport: GD584268

Address: Rua Raimundo Mendes de Carvalho, 840

Icaraí, Caucaia - CE, CEP: 61.620-130, Brazil.