By: Anthony Costa, 2L
Culture has been the United States’ largest export since the world became globalized and intrinsically connected. American English is the most spoken form of English worldwide, over 118 countries and territories have McDonald’s, and American music inventions such as blues, jazz, country, rock and roll, and rap are listened to globally. America’s hegemonic dominance in the Western hemisphere was established through militaristic dominance and policy standards such as the Monroe Doctrine and the Roosevelt Corollary, which further strengthened cultural ties between the United States and Latin American countries, extending to some political ideologies.
In 1988, Brazil enacted its 7th constitution. This constitution went further than its most recent iterations in establishing a right to free speech. In Article V, certain rights, such as the right of manifestation of thought, protection from discrimination based on political convictions, and the freedom of intellectual, artistic, scientific, and communication were enshrined. These provisions brought the political speech rights of Brazilians more in line with those of Americans.
Today, ideas proliferate faster than ever over the internet. Citizens in country A can use an online product created in country B, as easily and instantly as those who preside in the country where the product was invented. X (previously Twitter) is a social media platform created in the United States, which claims that “[d]efending and respecting the user’s voice” is a core value and a “two-part commitment to freedom of expression and privacy” reflecting American ideals of free speech.
Brazilian sovereignty over which websites and associated ideas its citizens are allowed to read, was called into question during a dispute starting in 2023, when Brazil’s Ministry of Justice and Public Security requested the removal of 500 accounts from the platform. The platform did not comply until it was forced through an executive degree that threatened fines and a platform ban.
International attention was drawn to Brazil’s state of free speech following these slews of censorship requests, leading to the publishing of “Brazil’s Crackdown on Free Speech” by Michael Shellenberger, which highlighted growing concerns over censorship in the country. The X dispute continued in April of 2024 when Alexandre de Moraes, a justice on Brazil’s supreme court, and the appointed elections chief (with unilateral power to order tech companies to remove online posts), and a close ally of Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, ordered X to remove several accounts accused of spreading “fake news.” X defied the order, prompting an official investigation into Elon Musk, the owner of X.
Moraes threatened to arrest X’s Brazilian legal representative, which led X to recall its staff from the country. Moraes then ordered internet service providers in Brazil to block access to X, and to fine individuals who tried to access it through a VPN. Eventually, X capitulated to the Brazilian government’s censorship requests. Brazilian politician Erika Hilton framed this as a victory for “the rule of law and national sovereignty.” While this may be true, it ultimately demonstrates that the exercise of Brazilian national sovereignty can sometimes amount to an exercise of censorship.
“[T]he ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas … the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.”- Oliver Wendell Holmes
