Current:Home > ContactSupreme Court declines to review scope of Section 230 liability shield for internet companies -Zenith Investment School
Supreme Court declines to review scope of Section 230 liability shield for internet companies
EchoSense Quantitative Think Tank Center View
Date:2025-04-09 05:52:17
Washington — The Supreme Court on Tuesday turned away a dispute that called for an examination of the scope of a federal law known as Section 230 that provides a powerful legal shield for internet companies and has faced growing scrutiny in recent years.
Enacted in 1996, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act immunizes companies from civil liability stemming from content posted to their sites by third parties. Defenders of the measure have said it has allowed the internet to flourish and paved the way for online innovation. But critics have said Section 230 has been interpreted too broadly to allow social media platforms and other sites to escape accountability, and some of the justices themselves have urged the Supreme Court to address lower courts' interpretation of the law.
The court did consider the scope of Section 230 for the first time last year, in a case that involved whether the law's protections extended to a site's targeted recommendations for users. The justices, though, sidestepped a ruling in the case involving Google that could've limited the legal shield.
In turning away this latest legal fight, which involves Snapchat, the court declines another opportunity to address the reach of Section 230.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the court's decision not to take up the case and said whether social media-platforms can be held responsible for their own misconduct warrants its review.
"[M]ake no mistake about it — there is danger in delay," Thomas wrote in a dissent joined by Gorsuch. "Social-media platforms have increasingly used Section 230 as a get-out-of-jail free card."
The Section 230 case
The case arose after an unnamed teenager, identified in court papers as John Doe, filed a lawsuit against Snap, the platform's parent company, after his science teacher allegedly used the app to groom the then-15-year-old by sending him sexually explicit content. Doe's lawyers argued that Snapchat's main feature — short-lived videos and photos — created an opportunity for the teacher to "draw Doe in without leaving a trail."
In addition to suing Snap, Doe's lawsuit also named the teacher and his school district. The company moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that Section 230 bars Doe's claims and any others that arise from a third party's use of the platform. A federal district court agreed that Snap was immune from civil liability and tossed out the suit.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit then upheld the district court's decision, citing a 2008 ruling that found Section 230 immunizes computer services from claims involving content generated by their users.
The full slate of 5th Circuit judges considered whether to review the case, and voted 8-7 against reconsidering it. The seven justices who favored rehearing the case argued that given the growth of internet companies, they cannot enjoy sweeping immunity when maintaining power over information and content posted to their sites.
Doe appealed the 5th Circuit's decision to the Supreme Court, arguing that Section 230 has been interpreted too broadly to shield internet companies from any suit that involves third-party content.
He argued that as social media use has proliferated in recent years, particularly among teenagers, platforms have created environments where children are targeted for abuse and exploitation online. Because lower courts have interpreted Section 230 as a broad legal shield, Doe said there is no way to hold internet companies accountable for misconduct.
"With Section 230 immunity in hand, social media platforms are doing next to nothing to address the dangers their platforms pose to children for fear that any action they take might also decrease membership, usage, and revenue," Doe's lawyers wrote in a filing urging the Supreme Court to review the 5th Circuit's decision.
They also warned that while there is legislation pending before Congress that would amend Section 230, it's unlikely those proposals will become law.
"This Court should not sit on its hands waiting for Congress to do something when, properly interpreted, Section 230 does not bar claims, like Doe's, which are based on an internet platform's own misconduct," Doe's lawyers said. "Overbroad immunity under Section 230 is a judicially created problem, and this court's intervention is the solution."
Melissa QuinnMelissa Quinn is a politics reporter for CBSNews.com. She has written for outlets including the Washington Examiner, Daily Signal and Alexandria Times. Melissa covers U.S. politics, with a focus on the Supreme Court and federal courts.
TwitterveryGood! (4499)
Related
- A White House order claims to end 'censorship.' What does that mean?
- US in deep freeze while much of the world is extra toasty? Yet again, it’s climate change
- Coco Gauff avoids Australian Open upset as Ons Jabeur, Carolina Wozniacki are eliminated
- Sorry, retirees: These 12 states still tax Social Security. Is yours one of them?
- Federal hiring is about to get the Trump treatment
- Ryan Gosling Reveals Why His and Eva Mendes' Daughters Haven't Seen Barbie Movie
- Nigerian leader says ‘massive education’ of youth will help end kidnappings threatening the capital
- Shooter who killed 5 people at Colorado LGBTQ+ club intends to plead guilty to federal hate crimes
- FACT FOCUS: Inspector general’s Jan. 6 report misrepresented as proof of FBI setup
- Fatal hot air balloon crash in Arizona may be linked to faulty ‘envelope’
Ranking
- Whoopi Goldberg is delightfully vile as Miss Hannigan in ‘Annie’ stage return
- Fake White House fire report is latest high-profile swatting attempt: What to know
- JetBlue-Spirit Airlines merger blocked by judge over fears it would hurt competition
- 'Ideal for extraterrestrial travelers:' Kentucky city beams tourism pitch to distant planets
- Could Bill Belichick, Robert Kraft reunite? Maybe in Pro Football Hall of Fame's 2026 class
- Some New Hampshire residents want better answers from the 2024 candidates on the opioid crisis
- Eagles center Jason Kelce set to retire after 13 NFL seasons, per multiple reports
- Sudan suspends ties with east African bloc for inviting paramilitary leader to summit
Recommendation
Global Warming Set the Stage for Los Angeles Fires
Mikaela Shiffrin scores emotional victory in slalom race for 94th World Cup skiing win
Russia’s intense attacks on Ukraine has sharply increased civilian casualties in December, UN says
Lawmakers announce bipartisan effort to enhance child tax credit, revive tax breaks for businesses
Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Hi Hi!
Cicadas are back in 2024: Millions from 2 broods will emerge in multiple states
Officials respond to pipeline leak at Point Thomson gas field on Alaska’s North Slope
Who is NFL's longest-tenured head coach with Bill Belichick out of New England?