Supreme Court weighs Google’s liability in ISIS terror case

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court appeared uninclined to rule in favor of a family seeking to hold Google accountable for the killing of their daughter in a terrorist assault, in the first case involving the federal statute credited with helping build the modern internet.

After hearing two and a half hours of oral arguments, the Supreme Court appeared concerned about reshaping the internet by reinterpreting Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a law from 1996 that protects Google, Twitter, Facebook, and other companies from lawsuits over content posted by others.

The truth is, we have no idea how these things work. Elena Kagan, speaking for herself and her colleagues, declared, “These are not like the nine best experts on the internet.” Some of the other justices giggled at this depiction.

Kagan argued that Congress, not the courts, should revise an outdated legislation that was enacted before the widespread use of the internet.

Judge Brett Kavanaugh, one of the court’s six conservatives, joined his liberal colleague in a unanimous decision on a case that appeared to transcend political affiliation.

To which Kavanaugh replied, “Isn’t it preferable to preserve things the way they are and put the responsibility on Congress to alter that?”

There is a lawsuit pending in court related to the 2015 terrorist assault in Paris that took the life of American college student Nohemi Gonzalez. Several of her loved ones were there in court to hear arguments about whether or not they may sue YouTube, which is owned by Google, for aiding the Islamic State in its efforts to recruit new members in violation of the Anti-Terrorism Act.