Supreme Court Rules Unanimously in Favor of Twitter in Case Concerning Allegations of Liability for Suggesting Videos Promoting Violent Militant Islam

The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a victory for internet companies, ruling in favor of Twitter in a case concerning allegations that YouTube was liable for suggesting videos promoting violent militant Islam.

The dispute stemmed from a lawsuit brought by the family of Nohemi Gonzalez, an American college student who was among the 129 people killed in Paris by terrorists in 2015. The family argued that YouTube, owned by Google, was liable for suggesting videos promoting violent militant Islam, which they said helped inspire the attack.

In an unsigned opinion in the case known as Gonzalez v. Google, the high court said it declined to address the application of the law, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, to the family’s claims.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is a powerful shield for internet companies, and the Supreme Court’s decision to sidestep the ruling could have limited the scope of the law.

In a related case involving similar allegations against Twitter, the court ruled unanimously on Thursday that such claims could not be brought in the first place under a federal law called the Anti-Terrorism Act.

The Supreme Court’s decision is a win for internet companies, who have said that Section 230 has helped the internet flourish. The ruling is also a reminder of the importance of Section 230 in protecting internet companies from liability for content posted by users.