The News-Times

Tech group urges DOJ to take sides in Supreme Court’s Section 230 bout

- By Cristiano Lima

A center-left tech group funded by Google, Apple and other companies is calling on the Biden administra­tion to come to the defense of the industry’s embattled liability shield, Section 230, in a high-stakes legal case picked up by the Supreme Court.

In a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, the Chamber of Progress urged the Justice Department to file a brief pushing back on calls to hold platforms accountabl­e for amplifying harmful content.

The Supreme Court last month agreed to hear Gonzalez v. Google, which will consider whether the tech giant is liable for allegedly recommendi­ng terrorist content to users through algorithms on its subsidiary video-sharing platform YouTube.

For decades, Section 230 has broadly shielded digital services from lawsuits for hosting and making “good faith” efforts to moderate objectiona­ble content. But it’s increasing­ly come under attacks from advocates and public officials who say it has allowed the tech giants to escape responsibi­lity for their decisions policing content.

Legal experts say the case, the first time the high court will directly weigh in on the law, could have sweeping ramificati­ons for how companies handle user-generated content.

In its missive, the Chamber of Progress called on the Justice Department to file “a brief in support of the defendants,” which is Google.

The group argued that Section 230 also allows platforms to provide critical services to users, including related to medical services, and that it was crucial for the court not to limit the protection­s “to ensure the continued availabili­ty of lifesaving reproducti­ve resources.”

“Should the Court curb Section 230’s protection­s for algorithmi­c curation, online services would face extreme threats of liability for promoting lifesaving reproducti­ve health informatio­n, otherwise criminaliz­ed by state antiaborti­on laws,” the group wrote in a letter cosigned by Advocates for Youth, a D.C.-based nonprofit that advocates on sexual health issues.

The Chamber of Progress lists Google, Meta, Amazon, Apple and dozens of other tech companies as “corporate partners” on its website, but says none of the companies “have a vote on our work.” (Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.)

The Justice Department did not return a request for comment.

The group’s letter sets up a test for the Biden administra­tion, which has at times both defended and attacked Section 230 protection­s.

As a candidate, President Biden tore into the law, saying it should be immediatel­y “revoked” and that companies like Facebook should be submitted to “civil liability” if they cause harm.

Since becoming president, Biden has said little on the topic, but the White House has tempered his call for a full repeal and pushed instead for “fundamenta­l reforms to Section 230.” But to date, Biden has yet to take any public action to push for changes to the law.

The Justice Department has its own history weighing in on the law.

Under former president Donald Trump, the Justice Department urged Congress to pass new legislatio­n to open tech companies up to greater liability for a range of harmful content, including terrorist content and child sexual abuse material. The efforts, which also targeted claims of “censorship” by Silicon Valley, was panned by top Democrats as overbroad.

But under Biden, the Justice Department has at times waded into cases in defense of Section 230, including to affirm the constituti­onality of the law in a lawsuit filed by Trump against Twitter for permanentl­y banning his account. (Twitter, now under new ownership, has reinstated Trump’s account.)

It’s unclear, however, if the Justice Department will take sides in Gonzalez v. Google, which stems from a lawsuit filed by the family of a student killed during the 2015 Islamic State terrorist attack in Paris alleging YouTube “aided and abetted” the extremist group online.

The letter is the latest instance of the Chamber of Progress challengin­g the Justice Department to take steps aimed at protecting users after the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade.

In July, the group sent a letter warning the Justice Department that it was underminin­g digital privacy protection­s and putting those who seek abortion at risk through its legal arguments, as we reported. The trade group argued the precedent could be seized by prosecutor­s in red states to scoop up user data and target abortions.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States