Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

Biden admin tells US Supreme Court law protecting social media companies has limits

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration argued to the United States Supreme Court on Wednesday (Dec 7) that social media giants like Google could in some instances have responsibility for user content, adopting a stance that could potentially undermine a federal law shielding companies from liability.

In the United States, social media companies cannot be legally treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by other users.
In the United States, social media companies cannot be legally treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by other users.

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration argued to the United States (US) Supreme Court on Wednesday (Dec 7) that social media giants like Google could in some instances have responsibility for user content, adopting a stance that could potentially undermine a federal law shielding companies from liability.

Lawyers for the US Department of Justice made their argument in the high profile lawsuit filed by the family of Ms Nohemi Gonzalez, a 23-year-old American citizen killed in 2015 when Islamist militants opened fire on the Paris bistro where she was eating.

The family argued that Google was in part liable for Ms Gonzalez' death because YouTube, which is owned by the tech giant, essentially recommended videos by the Islamic State group to some users through its algorithms. Google and YouTube are part of Alphabet Inc (Googl.o).

The case reached the Supreme Court after the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Google, saying they were protected from such claims because of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996.

Section 230 holds that social media companies cannot be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by other users.

The law has been sharply criticised across the political spectrum. Democrats claim it gives social media companies a pass for spreading hate speech and misinformation.

Republicans say it allows censorship of voices on the right and other politically unpopular opinions, pointing to decisions by Facebook and Twitter to ban dissemination of a New York Post article about the son of then-Democratic candidate Joe Biden's adult son, Hunter, in October 2020. REUTERS

Related topics

Social Media terrorism misinformation US supreme court

Read more of the latest in

Advertisement

Advertisement

Stay in the know. Anytime. Anywhere.

Subscribe to get daily news updates, insights and must reads delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking subscribe, I agree for my personal data to be used to send me TODAY newsletters, promotional offers and for research and analysis.