The Supreme Court rejected an effort to holdTwitterand other platforms responsible for aiding and abetting terrorism because the extremist groups posted fund-raising and recruiting content on their platforms.
The judges, though, sidestepped a ruling onSection 230, the provision of a 1996 law that generally protects social media from liability over their moderation of third party content.
The family of a victim of a terrorist attack on an Instanbul nightclub sued Twitter and other platforms under a 2016 antiterrorism statute.
Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
The law allows those injured by a terrorist act to sue anyone who aids and abets, by knowingly providing substantial assistance, or who conspires with the person who committed such an act of international terrorism.
Related Stories
Writers Guild Of America West Staff Union Wins Voluntarily Recognition, Moves To Negotiate First Contract
‘The King Of Kings’ Surpasses ‘Parasite’ To Become Top-Grossing Korean Film In The U.S.
In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas (read ithere), the court ruled that the plaintiffs had failed to establish that the tech platforms provided assistance to ISIS.
Watch on Deadline
As alleged by plaintiffs, defendants designed virtual platforms and knowingly failed to do enough to remove ISIS-affiliated users and ISIS related contentout of hundreds of millions of users worldwide and an immense ocean of contentfrom their platforms, Thomas wrote.
Yet, plaintiffs have failed to allege that defendants intentionally provided any substantial aid to the Reina attack or otherwise consciously participated in the Reina attackmuch less that defendants so pervasively and systemically assisted ISIS as to render them liable for every ISIS attack.
The justices declined to rule on the applicability of Section 230 in a separate case, brought by the family of a victim of a 2015 ISIS attack in France againstGoogle(read ithere).
Given the ruling in the Twitter case, they sent the case back to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
