 Brazil's Supreme Electoral Court has confirmed former President Jair Bolsonaro undermined democracy when he was president. He won't contest elections until 2030, what led to this verdict. Over 1,000 people have been arrested in protests after the police killing of French Algerian teen Nail. Does the French government have any answers? The right wing US Supreme Court has struck down relief for those with student debt. How will this affect millions? These are our stories today on this episode of Daily Debrief. Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro won't contest an election in Brazil for 8 years. The country's top electoral court says he undermined democracy when he said the electronic voting system could be hacked. His lawyers say the statements didn't matter because Bolsonaro lost the 2022 election. Bolsonaro returned to Brazil in March after three months in the United States. He sought a political comeback for himself and was repeating many outrageous claims of his election campaign. We'll go to Prashant from People's Dispatch now to ask him what this really means. Prashant Bolsonaro's lawyers make an interesting argument. They're saying that well he lost the election. So it doesn't matter what he said before it. Does that make sense? Well actually the issue here is basically that he lost the election as well. He didn't lose the election with grace or with propriety is really the point and it actually had a very violent impact. We know that in January this year Bolsonaro supported actually stormed key buildings in Brasilia. And why did they storm these key buildings? They stormed these key buildings because over many months a campaign was built up. You know Bolsonaro himself was the forefront of this campaign where he and his supporters basically kept saying that the Brazilian electoral system was liable to being manipulated. It could be hacked etc. Now this is despite the fact that multiple there was a lot of evidence provided it is not possible to hack it that way. You know multiple authorities had certified it but Bolsonaro and his supporters kept repeating these claims creating an overall sensation that the system itself was fraudulent and hence if he was defeated it was a false defeat. He was not actually defeated. So that was really the core of the issue here. So it's a very disingenuous argument when Bolsonaro's lawyers say that you know he lost the election so it's fine anyway because that's precisely the point. In fact if you look at some of our coverage of the people's dispatch coverage of the Brazilian elections you'll see that in many of these rallies there was this underlying sentiment that even if he loses it's because the electoral system is flawed and you know it is broken etc etc. So that is what the Supreme Electoral Council judges have taken a very clear stand against and also the fact that you know this goes back to this event in July 2022 I believe when Bolsonaro talks to foreign ambassadors and he basically you know gives the impression that this system is insecure. Now this happened in a public building. It was circulated on public media and you know public funds were used so that itself is a massive abuse of power. So it's not just about questioning the integrity of the system it's also about abuse of power as well. So this is a you know it's a vital moment a very important moment because it brings some amount of accountability to someone who basically not just questioned the system but actually attacked the system and you know the kind of the way these kind of messages works is that from Bolsonaro it's maybe just one statement some hints some insinuations and then it kind of gets amplified by the time it gets to the base you have a rock certain belief among a section of people that the electoral system is completely flawed and this calls into question the very possibility of democracy itself when you have a substantial section of people who are convinced that the electoral system is flawed all based on a campaign of lies and we are very cynical campaign of lies so that's really what because it's the same system under which he came to power in 2018 so he won the election right. So keeping all of this in mind I think that it's not surprising that the verdict has been it's a 5-2 verdict even those the two judges who voted against disqualifying Bolsonaro said that he had the freedom of expression so they justified using freedom of expression but the other judges have pointed out that freedom of expression does not mean the freedom to lie and they've said it very explicitly just because you're the freedom of expression it doesn't mean that you can blatantly and outrightly lie and that I think is really the core of the issue so he's been disqualified from contesting in any election till 2030 and it's 2008 years because it's a date is back to I believe October 2022 or something so that's why it's 2030 so very I think a very good judgment a very essential judgment because quite often you know leaders especially people who have been in positions of power and some of the highest positions of power in many of these countries go scot-free after making statements like this which affect the very which systemically affect and I think that's a very important thing here we should not see this just as an individual statement but as something that had a systemic effect on Brazilian democracy itself and I think that it is a recognition of that that the supreme electoral council has chosen to take action on these comments which could you know mean otherwise have been dismissed as okay it's just part of a campaign right right so I think that's so that way it is a very significant judgment right Prishnan but also it's not just a statement he made here or there which is actually the issue that a host of battery of charges which he faces what are those about right so Bolsonaro of course facing a variety of charges I think over a dozen if I'm not mistaken kind of similar to Donald Trump right and it's again interesting that he has been this is the first case he's been you know officially he faces action just as Trump is facing action on the leak documents case which is really the least of his crimes right so do for Bolsonaro I wouldn't say this is the least of his crimes but there are also so many other charges for instance the the proceedings related to the January attack in Brasilia have not really concluded yet he is very much you know he should be in the dark for that it's unclear what how that process will take that is of course his handling of COVID-19 I don't know if that will ever be brought to justice they have been cases against him for the way he's sort of you know and his policies are affected in the indigenous community as well the question of the amazon forest so Bolsonaro's years as president were among the most disastrous in the country's history and some of it might come you know some of it might lead to legal action but a lot of it will be just is likely to be taken as part of a president's policy framework and he'll never face action and I think this was again the question we talked about when it came to Trump as well that you know the fact of course is that Trump is never going to face legal action for what he's done to Cuba or what he's done to Venezuela similarly for Bolsonaro whether you know whether he'll ever be held accountable for what happened during COVID-19 the disastrous policies followed by Brazil during COVID-19 and it's really a very big question so I think keeping all this in mind sort of you know important to mark this verdict it'll be of course this oh throw throws the field open for other right wing challenges who have a similar platform the problem with people like Bolsonaro also is that it's not just one person it's also there is a you know there is a certain acceptability that a kind of that a particular kind of right wing politics gets when someone like Bolsonaro becomes president and this spawns an entire generation of politicians who follow that model as well so they will definitely be more in this in this trajectory of politicians who follow this kind of message who follow these kind of principles some of them may not be as crude as Bolsonaro and may not make such stupid mistakes you know of you know but and but will still remain very dangerous so still challenges galore so just because Bolsonaro has been temporarily and of course he's going to appeal this verdict so we don't know that's right yeah but assuming that he gets disqualified for eight years it's not that the challenge from the far right is over in Brazil right Prashant and you know what we'll be back with you in just another couple of minutes we go to France where the situation has only escalated over the past few days protests have broken out in many parts of the country and even in overseas territories many of the protests have led to violence as well people on the streets are condemning systemic racism blacks and alibs were also the majority of victims in recent police killings but France is also far from acknowledging this problem let's go back to Prashant Prashant is it really possible to look at this case of the French Algerian boy getting killed by police without looking at the history of France and Algeria and not just Algeria I think French colonialism and the policies of France as whole because see I think there have been a number of reports in recent times which have documented for instance that people coming from people from african or without african origins or Arab origins are more likely to be stopped at traffic stops in France and we know that just to of course explain the case once again what happened was this 17 year old boy was stopped a delivery driver was stopped at a traffic stop by the police was deemed a threat by the officer who you know shot him point blank and of course then the police first tried to claim that he was you know somehow it is his fault right but then the video came out and then basically that completely demolished those claims and kind of similar again to George Floyd and that moment in the United States as well for viewers to remember but like you said it's impossible to sort of see this without the both the incident itself and the protests that followed without looking at France's history of colonialism and racism the fact that even now people you know people of african or Arab origin are discriminated against in a variety of ways not just in terms of the legal system or the police system where you see these kind of incidents happening a lot but also in terms of the larger approach social approach of the state in terms of social indicators and there is a wide sense of marginalization that people of these communities feel and it is this that leads to these kind of spontaneous outbursts of protests that we see when an incident like this takes place an incident like this is significant because it rips the bandage of you know it's no holds barred after that and there's nothing really that anybody can say in justification of course some right wing sections have tried to sort of say that keep pushing the narrative that it's the boy's fault you know he was not raised properly for whatever etc etc and but overwhelmingly the mass protests and also the very unstructured nature of those mass protests it's not that in there's been like you said there's been a lot of violence and looting as well it's just this outburst of anger against a state which has withdrawn in so many ways from the lives of people but has reiterated but has strengthened the approach the its military militarized approach to people so you know in the one hand of course you have a complete withdrawal a failure to address the aspirations of people on the other hand you have a violence gaining more and more prevalence and I think that is what people are so upset about people are so angry about and hence you see this outburst of anger also important note that in the past say what do you call I think over the past in 2017 there was a law passed which enabled which expanded the scope of the police in terms of using violence at such places yes and that has really helped you know that has contributed to these incidents as well so keeping all of this in mind I think no surprise at all and these are often mentioned time and again it's not a surprise at all like I think there's a similar sort of round of incidents I believe in 2005 when a teen was also killed this way and across the world in many parts of the global north we see this time and again people from people from Africa people from African origin African origins people from Arab origins people from Hispanic origins all of them facing structural violence and structural and many of them losing their lives in the process and which is followed by and of course then the those in power make all these statements about oh it's unfortunate oh this is regrettable right while talking about those single incidents but refusing to address the larger reasons for the crisis that are there let push and that's exactly what many of the protesters actually have been saying that you know you're looking at the incident but you're not accepting the fact that the systemic problem here let's look at the response of the friend state to the protests themselves right now what what has that been like so like again in continuation of that trend the police the friend states response has just been to send large number of police so I think the latest numbers say that 45 000 police personnel have been deployed and you know hundreds of people have been arrested across this is the across the country uh the you know macron has uh he's made some for pass he was seen attending elton john concert right as they for instance right uh you know that he's made the usual appeals saying it's unfortunate calling for unity etc etc whatever but this is definitely a moment of crisis for this government but also I would think any government in the global north which faces such a moment because uh moments like this throw into sharp uh you know sharp focus the like I said the kind of structural reasons for this and then at that point the politicians those in power don't have any answers except these very anodyne words of sympathy and comfort and you know good good will and all that kind of stuff because confronting these issues requires a very honest reckoning with your present your past which would really shake the structure of the state so uh you won't find governments uh you know doing that so I think the french government is doing the only thing uh it the system allows it to do at this point we just send thousands of police people and try to sort of wait out the protests uh as much as possible we are recording on saturday the burial of Nile is supposed to take place on saturday I don't think it's happened yet as we record but whether this could lead to more protests very big question and even if the protest you know kind of come down in a few days I think there is a larger question for France because we've seen a variety of sections being unhappy with you know yes so we have seen months of protests by workers over pension reforms some years ago we saw the gilet jaunes the yellow west protests so France is definitely in a kind in a major turmoil and with and led by a government which is in complete denial and which sort of tries to you know uh Emmanuel Macron far more focused on supplying arms to Ukraine rather than you know addressing many of these issues so I think uh for normally you would uh I suppose the media would say this is a wake up call for whatever government is in power but I don't think these governments are sleeping their close their eyes are closed deliberately so you know wake up calls work for those who are asleep not for those who deliberately choose to close their eyes to the problem and I think the Macron government is definitely one of them right Prashant and obviously like the action the speaking much louder than the words right now thanks a lot for joining us and finally we return to the U.S. Supreme Court which has taken another anti-people decision it struck down the 400 billion dollar student debt relief plan introduced by President Joe Biden in a decision taken along clear ideological lines the conservative super majority in the supreme court said that the president overstepped his authority by introducing this plan the ruling favored the six republican states that had challenged this plan now the over 43 million citizens who could have benefited from the plan face uncertainty we'll go over to Anish people's dispatch to ask him what this really means Anish could you take us through the debt relief plan what was in it and why did the supreme court strike it down it sounded like a great thing to do well the plan itself was not a matter to be charged with the supreme court as per the supreme court's own decision that is the majority decision it was not whether or not the plan was good or not it was whether the executive had the authority to decide whether an existing law can be interpreted in a manner that can keep sweeping debt forgiveness for billions of students now the issue is that obviously a lot of this was something that was foreseen by a lot of progressives within the democratic party as well because the heroes act which was at the center of contention which was used as you know as a means to extend this debt forgiveness plan of 400 billion dollars was actually actually stipulated more or less clear conditions which was included national emergencies of different sort war famine and stuff like that so it was under these circumstances that you can actually you know extend debt forgiveness for educational loans for students who have suffered under such national emergencies now the issue was that how do you interpret that is that was a big question and the white house at the time in august last year decided that it could be interpreted as fact that there is an ongoing pandemic and the pandemic is a very valid condition for to offer and extend student forgiveness it was actually used not necessarily as a very legally sound means but effective means to address the growing student debt crisis in the country which is it stands at about 1.7 trillion dollars so about 400 billion dollars to be spent in the next 30 years was not a major deal but the effectiveness of it was at the heart of the question for the white house but obviously the supreme court decided because of its conservative majority a super majority six two three that is how the whole court was divided they decided that the white house did not have the authority to interpret the law in such a manner now the issue definitely comes comes down to how to extend the existing student loan forgiveness that the white house and the democrats do seem to be very keen on extending at this point so that is that is once one part apart from the existing dial not dialogue but the kind of discourse that exists among the right wing and definitely good republicans who try to deem it as an unfairness question that there is a fact that majority of americans are your citizens do not take any kind of student loans primarily because they can't afford to go to universities or colleges because the cost of higher education is exorbitantly high it is actually much higher than even the medium income of an average american household in many ways and so for them it is not it is not possible to pay or you know even imagine things are taking loans that high that they would have to pay for the next maybe decades of their lives 10 20 years of their lives so this is something that is one of the reasons why but the republicans do not address that they may make it seem as if that hardworking americans are being pleased off by the elites the elites in question is obviously most of them most of them who have been deemed as eligible under the law and labor plan are basically working class children the children whose parents who are working class would come from working class families who had to take loans so that they could you know pursue higher education again for higher social mobility so these are questions that never get addressed in such debates and discourses at the moment but definitely this this is a big setback for above millions of americans who were looking forward to this plan considering the kind of applications the number of applications that already came through after the loan waiver was announced okay anish now tell me about how this is going to actually affect those 43 million people who probably were awaiting this waiver to come through right yeah so it is quite difficult to say because at this point at this moment the democrats are not what we see from the time statements that we see from even establishment democrats they do not want to back out of the plan so there will be already the white house has released a statement that they will be using the higher education act of 1965 to address the higher education act of 1965 for those who do not know was introduced in the u.s as a sort of you know extending cheaper loans to students who cannot afford higher education especially in fields like science technology engineering and mathematics so it was a means to actually expand of you know the coverage of higher education among students and obviously it has been used in the past several times but never in the scale that the Biden administration currently wants to pursue which is like 400 billion dollars at the current flag that they have the last time they used it was in 2021 which had a six billion dollar debt forgiveness plan for students who were fleeced by the universities many of them private so that is what the Biden administration wants to pursue this was also something that was earlier at risk by some of the progressive elements within the democrats especially in the house of representatives but we need to see how that is going to go forward because there will definitely be again challenges legal challenges against such acts again the similar kind of arguments can be used like the manner in which that the executive cannot which is what the Supreme Court just write that the education that the executive cannot interpret or reinterpret existing legislation so the higher education act is also an existing legislation that will be used for such sweeping forgiveness plan so we need to really see how that is going to work on the other hand the moment for not just debt forgiveness but also cheaper education is quite booming at the moment because obviously pandemic has hit everybody and it is going to and working class movements are already mobilizing a lot of these lines calling for a significant debt relief program and at the same time also addressing the very exorbitant cost of education in the country at the moment thanks a lot for joining us with that and that's all we have for today thanks very much for watching daily debrief we'll see you again on Monday our website peoplesdispatch.org and our facebook twitter and instagram accounts have more of our stories and our youtube channel has more updates and this show daily debrief thanks again for watching