The Supreme Court is set to consider whether to revisit Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in a case involving Twitter (now known as X). In Doe v. X Corp., two unnamed plaintiffs are seeking to hold the site accountable for failing to remove child pornography, arguing that Section 230 does not bar their claims.
The dispute began when sex traffickers tricked John Doe 1 and John Doe 2 into sending them sexual content while they were young teenagers. After contacting Twitter multiple times, including an official from the Department of Homeland Security, the site removed the posts nine days later. The plaintiffs then sued, alleging that Twitter had knowingly distributed child pornography and failed to develop tools to prevent such content from spreading on its platform.
A federal district court dismissed most counts citing Section 230 immunity, a decision affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. However, the appeals court allowed claims related to how Twitter handles concerns about pornographic material to proceed because they address the site's design and reporting duties rather than its role as a publisher.
The plaintiffs are urging the Supreme Court to review this ruling, arguing that Section 230 does not grant immunity when companies allow "
Read the full article at SCOTUSblog
Want to create content about this topic? Use Nemati AI tools to generate articles, social posts, and more.
