Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Twitter and Google, Protecting Internet Platforms from Liability

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Twitter and Google, Protecting Internet Platforms from Liability

The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled in favor of Twitter in a case that experts claim could have fundamentally changed the way the internet works. The decision will have limited effects for speech online and was released at the same time as Google v. Gonzalez, which deals with YouTube and Section 230.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court dismissed a claim against Twitter under an anti-terrorism law after its algorithm recommended ISIS propaganda on its platform. The court also passed on deciding the scope of legal protections for internet companies in a case that had huge implications for how the internet functions. The issue involved determining whether Section 230 protects internet platforms from lawsuits stemming from their algorithms. This ruling follows within the same week as a similar case against Twitter involving allegations related to Antiterrorism Act.

Furthermore, SCOTUS issued two rulings in favor of tech companies—Twitter and Google—that will continue to shield them from liability for what users post on their platforms. In both cases, justices unanimously agreed that they would not have to contend with claims that they aided terrorism through tweets or content posted by terrorist groups such as ISIS.

Digital rights groups welcomed these SCOTUS rulings while organizations like ACLU and Electronic Frontier Foundation civil liberties director David Greene expressed their support.

The decisions clarify online platforms' duties regarding removing terrorist propaganda but avoid answering larger questions about their liability for hosted content.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote: "the court concluded that plaintiffs’ allegations are insufficient to establish that these defendants aided and abetted ISIS in carrying out the relevant attack." As such, hosting general terrorist speech does not create indirect legal responsibility for specific attacks—a victory for Twitter and other tech platforms facing numerous lawsuits alleging societal harm due to hosted content or terrorist activities facilitated by it.