Internet Companies Tell Supreme Court They Should Not Be Liable for Terrorism

February 21, 2023 by Tom Ramstack
Internet Companies Tell Supreme Court They Should Not Be Liable for Terrorism
The Supreme Court building. (Photo by Dan McCue)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court showed minimal interest Tuesday in reducing the legal protections for internet companies over inflammatory information their users post online.

The court’s greater concern was unleashing a flood of lawsuits that could drive technology companies out of business if they eliminate their liability exemptions under Section 230 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

“Lawsuits will be nonstop,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh said during oral arguments.

He was responding to arguments from an attorney representing the family of 23-year-old American student Nohemi Gonzalez, who was killed during ISIS attacks in Paris, France, in November 2015. The series of terrorist attacks killed 130 people.

Her family sued YouTube and its parent company Google, saying the algorithms they use for their recommender system contributed to the attacks. The recommender systems tailor content based on profiles of users and their history of internet searches.

The Gonzalez family argued YouTube led users to ISIS recruitment videos that radicalized Muslim sympathizers and helped to compel the Paris attack.

Google defended by invoking Section 230’s immunity from liability for content published on an internet service provider’s platform by third-party users.

The Gonzalez case is one of two cases the Supreme Court is hearing this week that accuse internet giants of failing to prevent user postings that contribute to crime and terrorism. Together, the cases could transform the control of Big Tech companies over information posted on their websites, according to legal analysts.

With worldwide users, Google says it is impractical to police all of the content posted on YouTube and other social media platforms.

Google won in federal court at both the trial level and on appeal.

Liberal and conservative Supreme Court justices said Tuesday that the consequences of reducing legal protections for internet companies could be more damaging than holding them liable for irresponsible postings.

Chief Justice John Roberts said that if the same algorithms direct users to a wide variety of interests, such as consumer products, it would be difficult to prove the companies were inciting terrorism.

“Then it might be harder for you to say that there’s selection involved for which you can be held responsible,” Roberts said.

Justice Elena Kagan told the plaintiffs’ attorney, “You are creating a world of lawsuits. Really, anytime you have content, you also have these presentational and prioritization choices that can be subject to suit.”

The Gonzalez family argued in its brief to the Supreme Court that regardless of whether the internet recommendations are done automatically by algorithms, Section 230 was never intended to protect the kind of content that encourages terrorism.

“Interactive computer services constantly direct such recommendations, in one form or another, at virtually every adult and child in the United States who uses social media,” the Gonzalez petition says.

The related case the Supreme Court is hearing Wednesday is Twitter v. Taamneh.  

The case considers whether social media platforms could be liable under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 for postings that encourage terrorism.

The lawsuit was filed by the family of Jordanian citizen Nawras Alassaf, who died in a 2017 ISIS attack in Istanbul, Turkey. The Alassaf family sued Twitter, Google and Facebook.

Twitter argued that holding it liable would expand the scope of the Antiterrorism Act far beyond what Congress intended.

Twitter, Google and Facebook lost at the trial level. On appeal to the Supreme Court, Twitter argued that holding the company liable would mean the act was a “statute of impossible breadth.”

It would be the equivalent of making banks and rental car companies liable if terrorists used their services to assist in an attack, Twitter’s attorneys argued.

The case is Gonzalez et al. v. Google in the Supreme Court of the United States.

You can reach us at [email protected] and follow us on Facebook and Twitter

A+
a-
  • Internet companies
  • Supreme Court
  • technology companies
  • telecom
  • In The News

    Health

    Voting

    Supreme Court

    Supreme Court Takes Up Religious Rights Dispute Over LGBTQ Books in Maryland Schools

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments Tuesday over the religious rights of parents in Maryland to remove their... Read More

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments Tuesday over the religious rights of parents in Maryland to remove their children from elementary school classes using storybooks with LGBTQ characters. The case is the latest dispute involving religion to come before the conservative-led court. The justices have... Read More

    April 21, 2025
    by Tom Ramstack
    Supreme Court Skeptical of Overriding Preventive Medical Tests in Obamacare

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is trying to decide whether to keep an Affordable Care Act provision that requires insurers... Read More

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is trying to decide whether to keep an Affordable Care Act provision that requires insurers to offer no-cost preventive care tests. The court heard arguments Monday on whether the procedure for deciding which tests can be included under the national insurance... Read More

    Supreme Court Says Trump Administration Must Work to Bring Back Mistakenly Deported Maryland Man

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Thursday said the Trump administration must work to bring back a Maryland man who was... Read More

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Thursday said the Trump administration must work to bring back a Maryland man who was mistakenly deported to prison in El Salvador, rejecting the administration’s emergency appeal. The court acted in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran citizen who had... Read More

    Supreme Court Takes Up $8B Phone and Internet Subsidy

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday in a major legal fight over the $8 billion a year the federal... Read More

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday in a major legal fight over the $8 billion a year the federal government spends to subsidize phone and internet services in schools, libraries and rural areas, in a new test of federal regulatory power. The justices are reviewing an appellate ruling that... Read More

    March 24, 2025
    by Tom Ramstack
    Supreme Court Rejects Children’s Lawsuit Seeking Injunction Against Climate Change

    WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to revive a lawsuit on behalf of children who said U.S.... Read More

    WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to revive a lawsuit on behalf of children who said U.S. energy policies that exacerbate climate change are damaging their futures. They said unrestrained climate change jeopardized their life, liberty, personal security and health. The 9th Circuit... Read More

    March 21, 2025
    by Dan McCue
    Supreme Court Set to Hear Two Major Cases Next Week

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is set to hear two of the major cases in its current term next week;... Read More

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is set to hear two of the major cases in its current term next week; one that will take a closer look at racial gerrymandering in Louisiana, the other considering federal court jurisdiction over Clean Air Act cases. The first hearing,... Read More

    News From The Well
    scroll top