Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh
Issue
Whether Twitter, Facebook, and Google aided and abetted an ISIS terrorist attack under 18 U.S.C. § 2333(d)(2) by hosting ISIS content, allowing ISIS to recruit and raise funds on their platforms, and algorithmically recommending ISIS-related content to users.
What Happened
Nawras Alassaf was killed at the Reina nightclub in Istanbul, Turkey on New Year's Eve 2017 when ISIS terrorist Abdulkadir Masharipov opened fire on the crowd, killing 39 people. Alassaf's family sued Twitter, Facebook, and Google under the Anti-Terrorism Act, which under JASTA allows civil aiding-and-abetting liability against those who "knowingly provid[e] substantial assistance" to a person who commits an act of international terrorism. Plaintiffs alleged the platforms aided ISIS in three ways: by hosting ISIS-affiliated accounts and content on platforms available to the general public; by running recommendation algorithms that matched ISIS-related content to users most likely to be interested; and by failing to take sufficient steps to remove ISIS content despite knowing it was present. Plaintiffs did not allege that ISIS or Masharipov used the platforms to plan or coordinate the Reina attack specifically. The Ninth Circuit allowed the claims to proceed. The Supreme Court reversed unanimously in an opinion by Justice Thomas. The Court held that the ATA's aiding-and-abetting provision, interpreted in light of JASTA's explicit reference to Halberstam v. Welch as the governing framework, requires a conscious, voluntary, and culpable participation in the wrongdoing — not merely knowing that a wrongdoer used your service. The platforms' general provision of services to billions of users, including ISIS, without any specific assistance directed at the Reina attack or at ISIS as distinct from all other users, fell far short of the knowing and substantial assistance the statute requires. The relationship between the defendants and the attack was too attenuated; the platforms' conduct amounted to passive nonfeasance rather than affirmative assistance.
Why It Matters
Established that online platforms do not face ATA aiding-and-abetting liability merely by knowingly hosting content from a terrorist organization or operating recommendation algorithms that surface that content, without evidence of specific, targeted assistance to the tortious act at issue. The decision effectively disposed of most terrorism-based ATA claims against social media platforms on the merits, without reaching § 230 — the companion case Gonzalez v. Google addressed § 230 but declined to decide it, leaving that question open.
Related Filings
Other proceedings in the same litigation tracked by this monitor.
How accurate was this summary?