In a decisive move, Brazil’s Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered the suspension of X, previously known as Twitter, now under Elon Musk’s ownership.Issued on Friday, this directive escalates the ongoing conflict between Musk and Brazilian authorities.

The telecommunications regulator Anatel now faces a 24-hour deadline to block the platform.Following this directive, internet providers must sever user access to X, though this process might not happen instantly.

Moreover, within five days, Apple and Google must eliminate the X app from their online stores.To enforce compliance, Justice Moraes has set a steep fine of R$ 50,000 ($8,800) per day against anyone attempting to access X through alternative means like VPNs.The legal spat intensified after Musk publicly denounced Moraes as a “tyrant” and “dictator” through postings on X.Moraes Orders Suspension of Musk’s Platform X in Brazil in Legal Standoff.

(Photo Internet reproduction)The confrontation deepened with Moraes freezing all financial assets of Musk’s Starlink Holding in Brazil on August 18.

This action aims to secure fines levied by Brazilian courts against X.Simultaneously, Musk declared that X would shut down its operations in Brazil, citing censorship by Moraes.Supreme Court vs.

Social Platforms in BrazilThe day before, the Supreme Court had demanded that X appoint a legal representative in Brazil within 24 hours.

This demand was communicated through the platform after it had already closed its local office.In a bold response, Musk shared an AI-generated image on X, mocking Moraes by comparing him to film villains from “Harry Potter” and “Star Wars.”On the night before the suspension, X announced it would not comply with Moraes’ orders and would wait for a judicial decision.The judicial scrutiny continues in the virtual plenary of the Supreme Court, where the First Panel is reviewing appeals from X, Rumble, and Discord against Moraes’ account blocking orders.Voting first, Moraes rejected these appeals, emphasizing that social platforms cannot claim user rights as their own.In addition, he reinforced that freedom of speech must align with responsibility and cannot shield illegal activities.This ongoing legal battle highlights a fierce power struggle.

It also raises critical questions about digital governance, free expression, and judicial reach in the digital age.In short, the implications of this case extend beyond Brazil, potentially setting global precedents for digital policy.