In Section 230 cases Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter v. Taamneh, the Supreme Court decided not to upend the foundations of the internet.
The Supreme Court on Thursday threw out a claim against Twitter under an anti-terrorism law after its algorithm recommended ISIS propaganda on its platform. More broadly, in a similar appeal against Google, the court passed on deciding the scope of legal protections for internet companies in a case that had huge implications for how the internet functions.
Those huge implications related to Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which states: « No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”
The decades-old law has been crucial to the creation and functioning of the modern internet but has come under scrutiny (including from Justice Clarence Thomas) for leaving so-called Big Tech companies immune from liability.
That led to concern in Gonzalez v. Google that the justices could upend those liability protections and thus the internet itself.
