In Brazil, debates over LGBTQ+ rights reveal a striking paradox: while the Supreme Federal Court advanced same-sex marriage rights in 2011, the legislature has remained a site of persistent resistance. Drawing on an original dataset of over 300 LGBTQ+-related legislative proposals presented since democratization, this talk explores how LGBTQ+ rights are introduced, stalled, and reshaped in Congress. These patterns highlight not only the limits of legislative responsiveness but also the strategic use of backlash against judicially recognized rights.

The presentation then turns to same-sex marriage as a key arena where these dynamics crystallize. Conservative actors have mobilized bills and discursive repertoires to erode or neutralize judicial progress, often appealing to procedural legitimacy while reinforcing exclusionary moral principles. This strategy is conceptualized as counter-juridification: dismantling rights established by courts through legislative means that appear procedurally democratic but substantively undermine equality and pluralism.

By connecting the broader legislative landscape with this emblematic case, the talk invites reflection on how courts and legislatures interact in shaping LGBTQ+ rights, and how these struggles contribute to ongoing debates about the meaning of democracy in Brazil and beyond.