Latest in U.S. Supreme Court
Twitter v. Taamneh alters the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act’s vague aiding and abetting standard but provides limited clarity.
The two cases involve the First Amendment implications of public officials blocking others on social media.
Thoughts on Gonzalez, Taamneh, and the future of Section 230.
The companion cases mark a major decision in platform liability for terrorist material hosted on their services.
The Supreme Court ruled that the FSIA does not apply to criminal cases and remanded common law arguments to the Second Circuit.
On Feb. 21 and 22, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter Inc., v. Taamneh, a set of companion cases dealing with the liability of platforms for terrorist material hosted on their services.
This term, the Supreme Court is set to review the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act for the first time. Six years of litigation, increasingly targeting U.S. companies, has revealed that the statute is poorly tailored.
Two seemingly unrelated Supreme Court cases up for oral argument in the next few weeks will have important implications for the use of emergency powers by the executive branch—and for the long-term health of U.S. democracy.
Part 3 of a three-part series on oral arguments in Turkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. v. United States, a case that raises the question whether the U.S. government can criminally prosecute corporations owned by foreign states.
The case raises novel questions of the FSIA’s applicability, as well as the extent of foreign sovereign immunity within criminal law.