Last Friday, a federal district court in the Eastern District of Virginia sentenced Joseph Hassan Farrokh, a 29-year-old man from Woodbridge, Virginia, to 102 months in prison for attempting to provide material support to ISIL.
Latest in Material Support
The last few months have seen a spree of lawsuits filed against social media companies for allegedly providing material support to terrorists groups, particularly ISIS, by effectively allowing those groups to use their systems.
Last week saw another lawsuit filed against social media companies for alleged materially supporting terrorists by providing service to ISIS. Here's the AP story on the lawsuit:
NEW YORK (AP) — The father of a young woman killed in the Paris massacre last November is suing Google, Facebook and Twitter, claiming that the companies provided "material support" to extremists in violation of the law.
This week, the federal district courts in both the Southern District of New York and the Northern District of Texas confronted ISIS’s ability to recruit Americans to travel overseas to join and fight for the caliphate.
A few months ago, Zoe Bedell and I wrote a series of posts
Tweeting Terrorists, Part III: How Would Twitter Defend Itself Against a Material Support Prosecution?
In Part I of this series, we listed the many designated foreign terrorist organizations (DFTOs) that seem to have overt Twitter accounts.
Tweeting Terrorists, Part II: Does it Violate the Law for Twitter to Let Terrorist Groups Have Accounts?
In the first part of this series, we noted the rather large number of designated foreign terrorist organizations that seem to have open Twitter presences, and we posed the following questions: Is Twitter openly violating the material support law by providing services to these organizations? And if so, does the Constitution preclude deploying that law against the company for activity that bears some significant relationship to publication?
Guess how many designated foreign terrorist organizations have apparently official Twitter feeds. Hint: More than you probably think.
Back in July, we wrote a lengthy piece about whether Apple could conceivably face civil liability for providing end-to-end encryption to criminals and terrorists.
A few months ago, we wrote a lengthy piece about the possibility that Apple could face civil liability for providing end-to-end encryption to criminals and terrorists. We got a lot of heat for this piece. But today it's looking pretty good.