Supreme Court will hear two cases seeking to hold social media companies financially responsible for terrorist attacks

Friends of Nohemi Gonzalez, an American exchange student who died in a Paris cafe, are struggling to deal with her sudden lossThe Supreme Court said Monday it will hear two cases seeking to hold social media companies financially responsible for terrorist attacks. Relatives of people killed in terror attacks in France and Turkey had sued Google, Twitter and Facebook, accusing the companies of helping terrorists spread their message and radicalize new recruits.

The court will hear the cases this term, which began Monday, with a decision expected before the court recesses for the summer, usually in late June. The court did not say when it would hear arguments, but the court has already filled its argument calendar for October and November., a 23-year-old U.S. citizen studying in Paris. The Cal State Long Beach student was one of 130 people killed in ISIS attacks in November 2015.

Her friend, Cal State student Niran Jayasiri, may have been the last to see Gonzalez alive, standing next to her at the café as

The GOP isn't going to like this case.

I see a major conflict of interest brewing here…

Like trump republicans?

Does this include domestic terrorists? Cause it should.

United Kingdom United Kingdom Latest News, United Kingdom United Kingdom Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Supreme Court takes up internet company immunity in YouTube disputeThe Supreme Court on Monday stepped into the issue of whether tech companies should have immunity over problematic content posted by users, agreeing to hear a case alleging that YouTube helped aid and abet the killing of an American woman in Paris attacks EamonJavers SquawkCNBC Super 🤘 EamonJavers SquawkCNBC Did anyone tell Musk!? EamonJavers SquawkCNBC What goes against section 230 & legal common sense is that carved out groups from the constitution are imposing rules on users who are actually under it. So the bourne intention of s230 to preserve freedom of speech for the people is actually extinguished. Which is plain mental.
Source: mynbc15 - 🏆 262. / 63 Read more »