Social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, faces potential suspension in Brazil after defying a court order from Justice Alexandre de Moraes. The judge had given the company 24 hours to appoint a new legal representative in the country or face a ban, with the deadline expiring just after 20:00 local time (23:00 GMT) on Thursday. Despite the looming threat, X has openly refused to comply, setting the stage for a significant legal standoff between the tech company and Brazilian authorities.
The court’s order stated that X must name a legal representative and pay fines for alleged violations of Brazilian law. The violations pertain to the platform’s alleged failure to block accounts accused of spreading disinformation, many of which are linked to supporters of former right-wing president Jair Bolsonaro. Justice Moraes had made it clear that X’s legal representatives would be held liable if any of the accounts were reactivated while under investigation.
Shortly after the deadline passed, X made its stance known through an official post, criticizing the judge’s orders as illegal. “Soon, we expect Judge Alexandre de Moraes will order X to be shut down in Brazil – simply because we would not comply with his illegal orders to censor his political opponents,” the post read. It further argued that Justice Moraes’ demands contradicted Brazilian law and declared that the company would not secretly comply with what it deemed “illegal orders.” X also stated its intention to publish the judge’s demands in the coming days in the interest of transparency.
The confrontation between X and Brazil’s judiciary is emblematic of a broader struggle over the regulation of online content and the boundaries of legal compliance for global tech companies. Justice Moraes, a prominent figure in Brazil’s judiciary, has gained notoriety for his efforts to restrict social media platforms, particularly in cases involving disinformation and political dissent. His actions are part of a larger investigation into former President Bolsonaro and his supporters’ roles in an alleged attempted coup on January 8th of last year.
This is not the first time a social media company has found itself under scrutiny in Brazil. In the past, other platforms have faced similar pressures from Brazilian authorities. In 2022, Telegram was temporarily banned for failing to cooperate with requests to block certain profiles. Meta’s messaging service WhatsApp also faced temporary bans in 2015 and 2016 for refusing to comply with police requests for user data. These actions reflect ongoing tensions between tech companies and Brazilian authorities over issues of compliance and freedom of expression.
Adding another layer to the conflict, the bank accounts of Starlink, Elon Musk’s satellite internet company, were frozen in Brazil following an order from the country’s Supreme Court. Starlink responded by stating that the order was based on “an unfounded determination” that it should be responsible for fines levied against X, which the company claims are unconstitutional. Musk further emphasized on X that “SpaceX and X are two completely different companies with different shareholders,” underscoring the separation between his various business ventures.
Starlink, a subsidiary of Musk’s SpaceX, was granted permission to operate in Brazil in 2022 under Bolsonaro’s administration. The company’s services hold significant potential in South America’s largest country, particularly in providing internet access to remote regions like the Amazon. However, the freezing of its bank accounts indicates that the legal battles facing Musk’s companies in Brazil may extend beyond X.
As the situation unfolds, X’s defiance of Brazilian judicial orders raises questions about the balance between compliance with national laws and resistance to what it perceives as overreach. The outcome of this standoff will likely have broader implications for how international tech companies operate in Brazil and other jurisdictions with stringent regulations on digital content. Whether X will face suspension or find a way to resolve the dispute remains to be seen, but the clash underscores the ongoing global debate over the regulation of online platforms.
