Washington, DC – The Bipartisan Policy Center submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court involving the case of Gonzalez v. Google LLC. This case marks the first time in history that the court will rule on the scope of Section 230, a highly debated statute that gives broad immunity to internet service providers for hosting third-party content on their platforms and is the foundation of the internet as we know it today. BPC expresses the view that the scope of Section 230 should be left for Congress to determine, not the judiciary, and rests in support of Respondent Google LLC.
Section 230 received broad, bipartisan support in its passing, but Congress could not have foreseen the technological developments that have led to the Internet as we know it today or what consequences it would have on our society. We argue that calls to change the scope or amend Section 230 be deliberated in Congress, not the courts, as it is customary and constitutional. We submitted our amicus brief, stating:
“BPC submits this amicus curiae brief in support of Respondent to express its view that the scope of immunity provided by Section 230 is best left to Congress. Section 230 was enacted as the result of bipartisan collaboration, and Congress has responded on a bipartisan basis to judicial decisions over the scope of Section 230’s protection, most notably in the 2017 enactment of the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017 (FOSTA SESTA), Pub. L. No.115-164, 132 Stat. 1253 (2018). In recent years, Congress has debated an array of proposals involving Section 230 and the policy issues surrounding the immunity that it grants to interactive computer service providers. The legislative branch is in the best position to address those policy issues, and it is poised to do so. BPC therefore respectfully asks the Court to allow the policy process to play out in Congress.”