Supreme Court dismisses lawsuit against Facebook over gender of users


The Supreme Court refused to hear the case against him on Monday. Facebook This was brought by an underage girl who was trafficked for sex by a user through her platform.

The judges refused to consider the girl’s case without comment.

defined asJane Doe“On the court papers,” said the girl. he is when was he 15 years old he is attracted by a grown man Facebook To leave him Mom and continue her modeling career.

HE IS Raped and sex trafficked by man before law enforcement rescued him.

HE IS to sue Facebook Texas courts are trying to hold the social network accountable for associating sex traffickers with victims on its platform.

Him lawyers claimed that the man’s account showed signs of sex trafficking, but yet Facebook did not break the user.

“The internet has exponentially increased the opportunities for sex trafficking, especially child trafficking. Social media platforms, in particular, are increasingly being used to communicate, recruit and sell sex with children. Social media provides unrestricted access to minors for predators to target,” the girl’s lawyers wrote in a court filing.

they argued Facebook It profits from the number of users, so it does not delete the accounts of sex traffickers.

However Facebook It said it could not be held responsible for the actions of its users and took action to dismiss the case.

The Texas Supreme Court agreed and urged the girl to appeal to the supreme court. However, at least one of them him cases are still pending in lower courts.

Section 230 of the Communications Code provides broadcasters with exemptions from communications or third parties. The girl’s lawyers asked the judges to examine whether the law was upheld. Facebook Even if the company allegedly misconducted the fraudsters by not crashing their accounts.

In recent years, Republican lawmakers have called for a reconsideration of the law, alleging that social media platforms are censoring conservative users.

Judge Clarence Thomas issued a statement on the girl’s case Monday, saying she still has a claim in lower court. he is He does not think that the Supreme Court should be involved at this stage.

However he is He warned that the issue of Section 230 must be clarified by the courts or Congress, as it gives companies comprehensive immunity.

It’s hard to see why the protection that §230(c)(1) gives publishers against being held strictly responsible for their content by third parties should provide protection. Facebook Judge Thomas is exempt from liability for his own ‘acts and omissions’”.

a spokesperson for Facebook did not immediately respond to a request for comment.


Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *