Gonzalez v. Google LLC
598 U.S. 617 (2023)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A court should decline to resolve complex questions of statutory immunity, such as under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, if the plaintiff's underlying complaint fails to state a plausible claim for relief.
Facts:
- The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.
- Google LLC owns and operates the video-sharing platform YouTube.
- ISIS and its supporters utilized YouTube to post videos and other content for recruitment, propaganda, and incitement of terrorist violence.
- In 2015, ISIS conducted a series of coordinated terrorist attacks in Paris, France.
- Nohemi Gonzalez, a United States citizen, was one of 130 people killed in the Paris attacks.
- Plaintiffs alleged that YouTube's recommendation algorithms suggested ISIS content to users, thereby assisting ISIS in spreading its message and carrying out its mission.
Procedural Posture:
- The family of Nohemi Gonzalez sued Google LLC in the U.S. District Court, alleging claims under the Anti-Terrorism Act.
- The District Court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim but granted plaintiffs leave to amend.
- Plaintiffs declined to amend and appealed the dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
- The Ninth Circuit (appellate court) affirmed the dismissal, holding that most of the plaintiffs' claims were barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
- The plaintiffs (petitioners) appealed, and the U.S. Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit's application of Section 230.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Should a court address the application of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to a complaint that fails to state a plausible claim for relief under the Anti-Terrorism Act?
Opinions:
Majority - Per Curiam
No. A court should not address the application of Section 230 to a complaint that states little, if any, plausible claim for relief. The Court reasoned that the plaintiffs' secondary-liability claims are materially identical to those in the companion case, Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, where the Court held that merely hosting and algorithmically recommending terrorist content does not constitute 'aiding and abetting' terrorism under 18 U.S.C. § 2333(d)(2). Because the Gonzalez complaint likewise fails to state a plausible claim for aiding and abetting, it is unnecessary to decide the separate and complex question of whether Section 230 would have provided immunity. The Court vacated the Ninth Circuit's judgment and remanded for reconsideration in light of the Taamneh decision.
Analysis:
This decision exemplifies the doctrine of judicial avoidance, where the Supreme Court sidesteps a major, controversial legal question when a case can be resolved on narrower grounds. By declining to interpret the scope of Section 230 immunity, the Court left existing precedent in place and avoided a ruling that could have drastically reshaped the internet. The decision instructs lower courts to first analyze the sufficiency of the underlying cause of action before engaging with the Section 230 affirmative defense. This approach ensures that the potentially dispositive immunity question is only reached when a plaintiff has first pleaded a viable claim.
