May 18, 2023
Decided May 18, 2023
Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, No. 21-1496
Gonzalez v. Google LLC, No. 21-1333
Today, a unanimous Supreme Court rejected claims that social-media companies could be held liable under the Anti-Terrorism Act for allegedly not doing “enough” to remove terrorist-related content from their services. In light of that ruling, the Court declined to address whether plaintiffs’ claims were barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Background: Under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) a United States national who is injured by an “act of international terrorism” may recover treble damages. 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a). Victims may also seek recovery from “any person who aids and abets, by knowingly providing substantial assistance, or who conspires with the person who committed such an act of international terrorism.” Id. § 2333(d)(2).
In Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, family members of a victim of the 2017 ISIS shooting at the Reina nightclub in Istanbul, Turkey, sued Facebook, Twitter, and Google under the ATA for aiding and abetting the attack. Plaintiffs did not allege that the terrorists who carried out the attack used the companies’ services or that the companies were aware of any specific ISIS accounts tied to the attack. Despite the extensive measures the companies take to block and remove terrorist accounts and terrorist content, plaintiffs alleged that the companies violated the ATA by not doing more.
The district court rejected plaintiffs’ claims, because (1) plaintiffs failed to plausibly allege that the defendants assisted committing the particular attack at issue and (2) it is not enough to allege that the defendants provided general assistance to a terrorist organization. The Ninth Circuit reversed, holding that allegations that a defendant assisted a “broader campaign of terrorism” are enough, even absent allegations that the defendant assisted the particular attack at issue.
Gonzalez v. Google LLC involves substantially similar allegations asserted by family members and the estate of a victim of the 2015 ISIS attacks in Paris. The trial court dismissed plaintiffs’ claims as barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1), which protects websites and other “interactive computer service” providers from claims based on third-party content, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed.
Issues:
Taamneh: Whether a defendant that provides generic, widely available services to all its numerous users and “regularly” works to detect and prevent terrorists from using those services “knowingly” provided substantial assistance under Section 2333 merely because it allegedly could have taken more “meaningful” or “aggressive” action to prevent such use.
Gonzalez: Whether Section 230 applies to recommendations of third-party content.
Court’s Holdings:
Taamneh: No. Section 2333 requires allegations that the defendant consciously, voluntarily, and culpably participated in the terrorist act at issue in such a way as to help make it succeed.
Gonzalez: Given the overlap with the allegations in Taamneh, the Court declined to address the Section 230 issue and instead remanded for consideration in light of Taamneh.
“[T]he fundamental question of aiding-and-abetting liability [is]: Did defendants consciously, voluntarily, and culpably participate in or support the relevant wrongdoing? … [T]he answer in this case is no.”
Justice Thomas, writing for the Court
What It Means:
The Court’s opinion is available here and here.
Gibson Dunn’s lawyers are available to assist in addressing any questions you may have regarding developments at the Supreme Court. Please feel free to contact the following practice leaders:
Appellate and Constitutional Law Practice
Thomas H. Dupree Jr. +1 202.955.8547 tdupree@gibsondunn.com |
Allyson N. Ho +1 214.698.3233 aho@gibsondunn.com |
Julian W. Poon +1 213.229.7758 jpoon@gibsondunn.com |
Lucas C. Townsend +1 202.887.3731 ltownsend@gibsondunn.com |
Bradley J. Hamburger +1 213.229.7658 bhamburger@gibsondunn.com |
Brad G. Hubbard +1 214.698.3326 bhubbard@gibsondunn.com |
Related Practice: Litigation
Reed Brodsky +1 212.351.5334 rbrodsky@gibsondunn.com |
Theane Evangelis +1 213.229.7726 tevangelis@gibsondunn.com |
Veronica S. Moyé +1 214.698.3320 vmoye@gibsondunn.com |
Helgi C. Walker +1 202.887.3599 hwalker@gibsondunn.com |
Related Practice: Media, Entertainment and Technology
Scott A. Edelman +1 310.557.8061 sedelman@gibsondunn.com |
Kevin Masuda +1 213.229.7872 kmasuda@gibsondunn.com |
Benyamin S. Ross +1 213-229-7048 bross@gibsondunn.com |
Related Practice: Privacy, Cybersecurity and Data Innovation
Ahmed Baladi +33 (0)1 56 43 13 50 abaladi@gibsondunn.com |
S. Ashlie Beringer +1 650.849.5327 aberinger@gibsondunn.com |
Jane C. Horvath +1 202.955.8505 jhorvath@gibsondunn.com |
Alexander H. Southwell +1 212.351.3981 asouthwell@gibsondunn.com |
Related Practice: White Collar Defense and Investigations
Stephanie Brooker +1 201.887.3502 sbrooker@gibsondunn.com |
Nicola T. Hanna +1 213.229.7269 nhanna@gibsondunn.com |
Chuck Stevens +1 415.393.8391 cstevens@gibsondunn.com |
F. Joseph Warin +1 202.887.3609 fwarin@gibsondunn.com |