The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals (Richmond, VA) just ruled that Section 230 was wrongfully adjudicated. It was only meant to protect online social networks that DO NOT INTERJECT THEIR OPINION CONTENT ONTO THE SITE.
Twitter, Facebook, Instagram etc. are NOT protected because they control their site through their political opinions.
This crashed directly with the California 9th Circuit ruling and almost assures not that the Supreme Court must take this case.
Zuckerbuck and company going down.
On Nov. 3, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals rendered a decision in Henderson v. Private Data that could revolutionize the internet, concluding that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act does not immunize “all” online publication decisions. The Fourth Circuit Court just determined Section 230(c)(1) no longer protects a service provider when it acts upon third-party content (i.e., as a secondary publisher or content provider), especially if those substantive contributions are unlawful.
Simply put, we have been right all along, and we now have the conflicting circuit court precedent to prove it. The Supreme Court needs to consider the Fourth Circuit’s arguments and address this split between circuits.
As I’ve also discussed in Human Events and The Gateway Pundit, Section 230 has two distinct problems. Section 230(c)(1) is untenable “as applied” and it is unconstitutional “on its face.”