The Brazilian Supreme Court has mandated the suspension of X, formerly known as Twitter, following the platform’s failure to meet a legal deadline to appoint a local representative. Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who has been in a contentious legal battle with X’s owner Elon Musk since April, issued the order for X’s immediate suspension in Brazil. This directive requires X to adhere to court orders, pay fines, and appoint a new legal representative before resuming operations.
Justice Moraes has given Brazil’s National Telecommunications Agency a 24-hour deadline to enforce the suspension. This involves notifying over 20,000 broadband internet providers in Brazil, each of which must block access to X. The agency’s president, Carlos Manuel Baigorri, has confirmed that the order has been relayed to internet providers, who are expected to implement the block over the weekend.
Initially, Moraes had also instructed Apple and Google to block the X app and restrict VPN use to prevent access. However, this part of the order was later rescinded to avoid unnecessary disruptions to these third-party companies, pending further statements from X and Musk. The court has imposed a daily fine of R$50,000 on any individuals or entities that attempt to bypass the suspension using VPNs.
The conflict between X and the Brazilian government began in April when Moraes ordered the suspension of several accounts accused of spreading disinformation, a move Musk criticized as censorship. X had been without a legal representative in Brazil since August 17, following Musk’s decision to cease operations there in response to what he deemed censorship. On August 23, Moraes instructed X to appoint a new legal representative within 24 hours or face immediate suspension, a deadline X failed to meet.
In response to the suspension, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva emphasized that all foreign investors must adhere to Brazilian laws. Additionally, Moraes has also taken action against Musk’s satellite and internet provider, Starlink, by freezing its local bank accounts to enforce fines against X. Legal experts argue that Starlink, a separate entity, should not be held liable for X’s issues, and the company has challenged the account freeze in court while promising to continue its services.
