Social media platforms don’t pay much attention to national boundaries. They operate on a global scale, often disregarding the laws of individual countries to serve their business interests. One prime example of this is X (formerly known as Twitter), with over 600 million active accounts spanning across nearly every country. Each of these countries has its own unique regulations, but they often clash with the practices of major U.S.-based social media companies.
The growing tensions between national regulatory efforts and the interests of U.S. tech firms are creating what experts call a form of digital imperialism. In this blog post, we’ll explore how U.S.-based platforms are using American law to challenge foreign tech regulations, why this is happening, and the wider implications for global digital governance.
The Digital Battle: US Law vs. Foreign Regulations
The latest flare-up in this global struggle occurred in February 2025, when a U.S. lawsuit was filed against Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes. The lawsuit challenged his orders to suspend accounts on U.S. social media platforms like Rumble and Trump Media & Technology Group. These accounts were allegedly linked to disinformation campaigns in Brazil. This marks another instance in a series of legal challenges that underscore a bigger problem: U.S. companies invoking American law to defy foreign regulations.
What’s at the Core of the Dispute?
At the heart of the case is Allan dos Santos, a right-wing Brazilian influencer who fled to the U.S. in 2021 after being accused by Brazilian authorities of spreading disinformation and inciting violence. Brazil requested his extradition, but U.S. authorities have refused, claiming that this case involves free speech rather than criminal activity.
The Lawsuit’s Key Arguments:
- Censorship or Oversight?: The lawsuit argues that Brazil’s judicial actions to suspend disinformation-linked accounts amount to censorship rather than proper regulation of harmful content.
- Jurisdictional Overreach: The platforms claim that, since the case involves a U.S.-based company and a U.S. citizen (the target of the ban), the First Amendment protections of the U.S. Constitution should take precedence.
A Florida judge sided with the tech companies, ruling that Rumble and Trump Media don’t have to comply with Brazilian orders, escalating the global debate on digital governance.
The Bigger Picture: US Tech Giants Push Back Against Global Regulation
The lawsuit exemplifies a broader trend where U.S. tech giants increasingly use American legal protections to shield themselves from global regulations. The debate about platform accountability is no longer limited to corporate lobbying or political pressure; it’s becoming a battle fought in courtrooms around the world.
- Lobbying: Big tech companies like Meta (formerly Facebook), Google, and X have long fought against national regulations that seek to address issues like disinformation, hate speech, and online manipulation.
- Legal Challenges: Now, they are challenging these regulations directly in courts, including U.S. courts, in an attempt to prevent compliance with foreign laws.
This tactic isn’t new. For example, in 2020, the Brazilian “Fake News Bill” aimed to hold platforms accountable for the spread of disinformation. Google and Meta mounted aggressive campaigns to block the bill, warning that it could undermine free speech and hurt small businesses.
Corporate Power Meets Political Influence
What sets the current digital battle apart is the blurring of lines between corporate interests and political influence. Both Trump Media and X are aligned with the political and ideological priorities of the U.S. right-wing, with connections to former President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk.
- Trump Media was predominantly owned by Trump, with 53% of shares, before he moved his stake into a trust in late 2024.
- Elon Musk, a strong advocate for free speech, has turned X into a platform that supports controversial political ideologies, further deepening the intersection between politics, corporate power, and free speech.
This confluence of corporate and political interests has resulted in a new era of digital regulation, where U.S. free speech protections are used to challenge foreign efforts to regulate digital platforms.
Free Speech: A Double-Edged Sword?
The issue at hand is the interpretation of free speech. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees broad protections for speech, including on digital platforms. However, this expansive understanding of free speech is not universally shared.
- Europe and countries like Brazil adopt a proportionality-based approach to free speech, balancing it against other fundamental rights like democratic integrity, human dignity, and public order.
- This approach recognises that while freedom of expression is fundamental, certain restrictions are necessary to protect society from harms like hate speech, disinformation, and violence.
The U.S. model of free speech, which allows more unrestricted speech, is at odds with the more regulated models in other democracies. For instance, the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) and the UK’s Online Safety Bill impose stricter rules for online platforms, including disinformation and content moderation obligations.
The Impact on Global Digital Governance
This ongoing battle raises critical questions about the future of digital governance. Will U.S. tech giants be able to continue using American law to challenge foreign regulations? Or will countries strengthen their own laws to assert sovereignty over digital spaces?
- Brazil, the European Union, and other regions like Canada and Australia are increasingly developing regulatory frameworks to address online harms.
- These efforts could face significant resistance from U.S. tech companies, who argue that such regulations could stifle free speech and hinder their business interests.
The global implications of this struggle will shape the future of digital governance. Countries may need to consider how they can balance corporate power, freedom of expression, and the need to protect public interests in the digital age.
What’s Next for Global Tech Regulation?
The legal battles between U.S. tech giants and foreign governments are just the beginning. As digital imperialism continues to emerge as a global issue, the question of who controls the rules of the internet will be hotly contested. U.S. platforms’ ability to challenge foreign regulations may set a dangerous precedent, allowing companies to undermine national sovereignty in favour of their corporate interests.
As global regulation continues to evolve, it will be important to track how this struggle plays out, especially as countries like Brazil, the EU, and others continue to shape their tech policies. The future of digital governance will ultimately depend on finding a balance between protecting free speech and ensuring that platforms take responsibility for the harm caused by disinformation and online manipulation.
Relevant Links for Further Reading
