If your dream is to scroll X on the beaches of Rio, well, we have bad news (and also, we have some questions about your dream): the Brazilian Supreme Court upheld a total ban of the social media platform this week.

The ban stems from a Brazilian law that requires X to have a legal representative in the country. Yet, Elon Musk, X's owner, refused to comply.

X “seems to believe it’s above the law… Economic power and the size of a bank account do not give rise to outlandish immunity," Flavio Dino, one of the Brazilian justices wrote of the decision, reports the New York Times.

But not everyone agrees. Jameel Jaffers, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, told the Times that what bothers him is that "increasingly, undemocratic governments can point to democratic ones to justify their actions. …Where there are narrower ways of addressing privacy concerns or misinformation concerns, governments should use those narrower means.”

Fábio de Sá e Silva, a professor of Brazilian studies at the University of Oklahoma, pushed back: “The world looks at Brazil now and sees something is being done there to push back. It might encourage some other countries to do the same.”

But Brazil went a step further than just banning X. As The Guardian reports, a Brazilian judge " blocked the local bank accounts for Musk’s satellite and internet provider Starlink. The aim was to enforce fines imposed on X," which totalled over $18 million as of August.

Starlink initially chose not to comply with the freeze and the court-ordered blocking of X, but, according to CNBC, the company recently stated that "regardless of the illegal treatment of Starlink in freezing of our assets, we are complying with the order to block access to X in Brazil. We continue to pursue all legal avenues, as are others who agree that @alexandre’s recent orders violate the Brazilian constitution."

Free Speech

Musk's troubles in Brazil began when the government asked X to block certain accounts it deemed dangerous. Musk refused to do so. Yet, as The Verge writes, In April 2022, Musk posted on what was then called Twitter: "By 'free speech', I simply mean that which matches the law. I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law. If people want less free speech, they will ask government [sic] to pass laws to that effect. Therefore, going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people." The inconsistency of Musk's actions toward hate speech on X has been a major contributor to the refusal of companies to advertise of the platform.

Verdict

With mounting litigation and cratering revenue, Musk has found that X is not the shiny toy he thought he was buying. But the refusal to comply with Brazilian law in order to keep his platform available to one of the world's largest countries is a self-inflicted wound. Moreover, if the recent arrest of Telegram's founder in France is any warning, Musk may want to stay out of Brazil for awhile.