Kent Scheidegger
The U.S. Supreme Courtroom declined to take up the case of Jane Doe v. Fb, No. 21-459. Justice Thomas agreed, however solely in the interim.
In 2012, an grownup, male sexual predator used Fb to lure 15-year-old Jane Doe to a gathering, shortly after which she was repeatedly raped, overwhelmed, and trafficked for intercourse.Doe ultimately escaped and sued Fb in Texas state courtroom, alleging that Fb had violated Texas’ anti-sex trafficking statute and dedicated varied common-law offenses. Fb petitioned the Texas Supreme Courtroom for a writ of mandamus dismissing Doe’s swimsuit. The courtroom held {that a} provision of the Communications Decency Act often known as §230 bars Doe’s common-law claims, however not her statutory sex-trafficking declare.
The breadth of Part 230 is a matter of nice controversy. Justice Thomas believes the Courtroom ought to evaluation the “expansive” interpretation prevailing in decrease courts. Sadly for Jane Doe, the time shouldn’t be but ripe for the U.S. Supreme Courtroom to take this specific case.
The Courtroom’s jurisdiction to evaluation state courtroom instances is extra restricted than its jurisdiction to evaluation instances from the decrease federal courts. Congress has restricted it to evaluation closing judgments. This case shouldn’t be but closing as a result of a part of Jane Doe’s swimsuit can proceed.
However in an applicable case, we will anticipate Justice Thomas to be able to rein within the expansive interpretation.
Right here, the Texas Supreme Courtroom afforded writer immunity regardless that Fb allegedly “is aware of its system facilitates human traffickers in figuring out and cultivating victims,” however has nonetheless “did not take any affordable steps to mitigate the usage of Fb by human traffickers” as a result of doing so would value the corporate customers—and the promoting income these customers generate…. It’s exhausting to see why the safety §230(c)(1) grants publishers towards being held strictly chargeable for third events’ content material ought to shield Fb from legal responsibility for its personal “acts and omissions.”
In different orders checklist [in]motion, the Courtroom turned down the Invoice Cosby case, Pennsylvania v. Cosby, No. 21-793.
