U.S. Supreme Court,
Communications Law
Apr. 5, 2023
Two recent cases confirm by their own admission even SCOTUS gets confused
During the lengthy arguments some of the justices struggled with what linked Twitter to the perpetrators of the terror attack, as well as what was considered “aiding and abetting.”
A. Marco Turk
Emeritus Professor
CSU Dominguez Hills
Email: amarcoturk.commentary@gmail.com
A. Marco Turk is a contributing writer, professor emeritus and former director of the Negotiation, Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding program at CSU Dominguez Hills, and currently adjunct professor of law, Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution, Pepperdine University Caruso School of Law.
The first litigated (Google v. Gonzalez LLC) is the initial SCOTUS case to consider the scope of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects websites from liability simply by airing content that has been provided by its users. In Gonzalez, the plaintiffs' claim Google as owner of YouTube aided and abetted the terrorist group ISIS in violation of the federal anti-terrorism statute, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The sord...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In