You’ve likely heard the news: X has announced that it is closing its business operations in Brazil with immediate effect. However, the company’s service will still be accessible to users nationwide. This decision follows a tense standoff between X and Alexandre de Moraes, the president of the Superior Electoral Court and a justice of the Supreme Federal Court in Brazil.
The tension between X and Brazilian authorities
The conflict began when de Moraes threatened to arrest one of X’s legal representatives if the company did not comply with his demands to remove specific content from the platform. According to X, de Moraes issued this threat through a “secret order,” which the company has since made public.
Last night, Alexandre de Moraes threatened our legal representative in Brazil with arrest if we do not comply with his censorship orders. He did so in a secret order, which we share here to expose his actions.
— Global Government Affairs (@GlobalAffairs) August 17, 2024
Despite our numerous appeals to the Supreme Court not being heard,… pic.twitter.com/Pm2ovyydhE
Faced with either complying with what it deems to be unlawful censorship or protecting its employees, X opted to close its local operations. The company stated that this drastic measure was taken “to protect the safety of our staff.”
Elon Musk, the owner of X, has been vocal about the situation, claiming that de Moraes’ demands would have forced the company to “break (in secret) Brazilian, Argentinian, American, and international law.” Musk also expressed that the decision to shut down operations in Brazil was tough but necessary to maintain the company’s integrity. “If we had agreed to @alexandre’s (illegal) secret censorship and private information handover demands, there was no way we could explain our actions without being ashamed,” Musk said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Due to demands by “Justice” <a href="https://twitter.com/alexandre?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Alexandre</a> in Brazil that would require us to break (in secret) Brazilian, Argentinian, American and international law, 𝕏 has no choice but to close our local operations in Brazil.<br><br>He is an utter disgrace to justice. <a href="https://t.co/yAvX1TpuRp">https://t.co/yAvX1TpuRp</a></p>— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1824839784852013125?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 17, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>A question of democracy
X has criticised de Moraes for his actions, accusing him of disregarding the principles of democratic governance. The company released a statement through its Global Government Affairs account, stating that de Moraes’s actions are “incompatible with democratic government.” The statement further highlighted the situation as a choice for the Brazilian people: “The people of Brazil have a choice to make—democracy or Alexandre de Moraes.”
The tension between X and de Moraes has been building for some time. In April, Musk openly defied de Moraes’ orders to block certain accounts in Brazil, arguing that such actions were unconstitutional. This defiance led de Moraes to initiate an obstruction of justice inquiry against Musk.
Later that same month, under pressure from Brazil’s top courts, X announced that it would comply with all court orders, even as tensions continued to simmer.
Government pressure on social media platforms
This issue is part of a broader pattern of conflict between the Brazilian government and social media platforms. In April, the House Judiciary Committee in the United States released an interim report, accusing the Brazilian government of trying to force X and other platforms to censor over 300 accounts. These accounts reportedly included those of former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro, a federal senator, and a journalist.
Despite these challenges, X remains committed to keeping its platform open for users in Brazil, even as it withdraws its business operations from the country. The company’s decision reflects a growing concern over the balance between complying with local laws and maintaining global free speech and user safety standards.
