Skip to main content

Headline Roundup February 22nd, 2023

Supreme Court Justices Hesitant to Upend Section 230 in Google Case

Summary from the AllSides News Team

Supreme Court justices appeared wary of making major changes to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, observers said — in part because of wariness over their understanding of the internet. 

Key Quotes: At one point, Justice Samuel Alito said he was “completely confused” after petitioner’s counsel Eric Schnapper discussed how video thumbnail placement might be considered partly YouTube’s own speech as well as that of a third party. Justice Elena Kagan suggested that the issue might be better left to Congress, since the justices were “not, like, the nine greatest experts on the internet.” 

The Case in Question: The Supreme Court is considering Gonzalez v. Google, in which the plaintiffs — parents of an American college student killed in an ISIS terrorist attack — are suing Google for allegedly violating the Anti-Terrorism Act by hosting ISIS videos on YouTube. 

What’s Section 230? Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act allows online platforms like Facebook to host content posted by third parties without bearing the legal responsibility of a “publisher” of that content. Without that protection, experts say, sites like Google couldn’t function the way they do today. Some Democrats and Republicans have previously called for reforming the law, albeit for different reasons. 

How the Media Covered It: Coverage was common across the spectrum, with some articles placing more emphasis on justices’ purported lack of internet expertise. However, The Verge (Lean Left bias) took a different approach, calling the hearing both “remarkably entertaining” and “unexpectedly measured.”

Featured Coverage of this Story

From the Right
Justices 'completely confused' during arguments in Section 230 case against Google that could reshape internet
Justices 'completely confused' during arguments in Section 230 case against Google that could reshape internet

Olly Curtis/Future via Getty Images

News

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in the first of two cases this week that explore the extent of the legal protections given to tech companies that provide a platform for third-party users to publish content.

The case in question, Gonzalez v. Google, deals with recommendations and algorithms used by sites like YouTube that go further than simply allowing users to post content but arrange and promote the content to users in a certain way. YouTube and Google are facing litigation over allegedly recommending videos created by ISIS and used to recruit new...

Open on Fox News Digital
From the Left
The Supreme Court is deciding the future of the internet, and it acted like it
The Supreme Court is deciding the future of the internet, and it acted like it

Alex Castro / The Verge

Analysis

“We’re a court. We really don’t know about these things. These are not the nine greatest experts on the internet.”

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan made the wryly self-deprecating comment early in oral arguments for Gonzalez v. Google, a potential landmark case covering Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. The remark was a nod to many people’s worst fears about the case. Gonzalez could unwind core legal protections for the internet, and it will be decided by a court that’s shown an appetite for overturning legal precedent and reexamining long-standing speech law.

...
Open on The Verge
Possible Paywall
From the Center
“Not, like, the nine greatest experts on the internet”: Justices seem leery of broad ruling on Section 230
Analysis

The Supreme Court on Tuesday debated the scope of a 27-year-old federal law that shields social-media companies from liability for content published by others. At issue in Gonzalez v. Google is whether Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects internet platforms when their algorithms target users and recommend someone else’s content. Google and its supporters warned in legal briefs that a ruling against them could massively reshape legal liability for tech companies across the county, but after nearly three hours of argument on Tuesday, the justices appeared wary of taking such...

Open on SCOTUSblog

More headline roundups

More News about Supreme Court on AllSides

News from the Left

News from the Center

News from the Right