Neon Nettle
© 2021 Neon Nettle

Subscribe to our mailing list

Advertise Contact About Us Our Writers T&C's Privacy Support Us © 2021 Neon Nettle All Rights Reserved.

Facebook Responsible for Sex Trafficking on Its Platform, Court Rules

Texas court rules against tech giant in landmark lawsuit for teenage victims

 on 28th June 2021 @ 7.00pm
a texas court has ruled against facebook in a sex trafficking lawsuit © press
A Texas court has ruled against Facebook in a sex trafficking lawsuit

Facebook is responsible for sex trafficking on its platform and may be held liable for abuse suffered by victims, the highest court in Texas has ruled.

The ruling against the Big Tech giant was made during a lawsuit for teenage victims of sex trafficking who allege they were targeted on Facebook.

Facebook's legal team argued that the social network was protected against liability due to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, according to The Verge.

The legal shield "protects websites from lawsuits if a user posts something illegal, although there are exceptions for copyright violations, sex work-related material, and violations of federal criminal law."

The Texas Supreme Court shot down the argument, however, and ruled on Friday that Facebook is not a "lawless no-man's-land," and should be held liable for sex trafficking.

"We do not understand section 230 to 'create a lawless no-man's-land on the Internet' in which states are powerless to impose liability on websites that knowingly or intentionally participate in the evil of online human trafficking," the court's majority wrote.

the texas supreme court ruled that facebook is not a  lawless no man s land © press
The Texas Supreme Court ruled that Facebook is not a 'lawless no-man's-land'

"Holding internet platforms accountable for the words or actions of their users is one thing, and the federal precedent uniformly dictates that section 230 does not allow it," the opinion said, according to the Houston Chronicle.

"Holding internet platforms accountable for their own misdeeds is quite another thing.

"This is particularly the case for human trafficking."

The court ruling arrived following three Texas-based lawsuits that were brought against Facebook, which alleged the social media platform enabled sex traffickers to target minors.

The victims from Houston were ages 13, 14, and 16 when they were preyed upon by sex traffickers through Facebook apps.

The lawsuit alleged that the California-based tech behemoth was negligent in not protecting minors from sex traffickers on the social media website.

Pimps allegedly enticed sex trafficking victims with "false promises of love and a better future," including lies of modeling jobs that didn't exist.

"One of the cases, involving a 14-year-old from Spring, recounts how the girl was recruited, groomed, and sold in 2018 by a man she met on Instagram," the Houston Chronicle reported in April.

"The trafficker beat her and sold her for commercial sex for three weeks.

"McAdams said the child has undergone intensive therapy in the years since."

Annie McAdams, a lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said the decision against Facebook was unprecedented.

"Our clients have fought for over two years for the chance to bring their case," McAdams said.

"While we have a long road ahead, we are grateful that the Texas Supreme Court will allow these courageous trafficking survivors to have their day in court against Facebook."

"With the help of Chapter 98 protection, we believe trafficking survivors in Texas can expose and hold accountable businesses such as Facebook that benefit from these crimes of exploitation," McAdams added.

Chapter 98 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code states, "A defendant who engages in the trafficking of persons or who intentionally or knowingly benefits from participating in a venture that traffics another person is liable to the person trafficked, as provided by this chapter, for damages arising from the trafficking of that person by the defendant or venture."

A Facebook spokesperson told Fox Business, "We're reviewing the decision and considering potential next steps.

"Sex trafficking is abhorrent and not allowed on Facebook.

"We will continue our fight against the spread of this content and the predators who engage in it."

the court ruled that facebook is not protected by section 230 when sex trafficking is concerned © press
The court ruled that Facebook is not protected by Section 230 when sex trafficking is concerned

A 2020 report by the Human Trafficking Institute found that Facebook was the most common website used for sex trafficking, accoridng to The Blaze.

"In 2020, 59% of online victim recruitment in active sex trafficking cases occurred on Facebook, making it by far the most frequently referenced website or app in public sources connected with these prosecutions, which was also true in 2019," the report said.

"Surprisingly, despite Facebook's reputation as a less popular platform among teenagers, it was a more common platform for recruiting child victims than adult victims in 2020 active sex trafficking cases.

"In fact, 65% of child victims recruited on social media were recruited through Facebook compared to just 36% of adults."

Earlier this month, 34 women launched a lawsuit against Pornhub, claiming the adult site is running a "criminal enterprise" that is knowingly profiting off videos involving sex trafficking, rape, and child porn.

[RELATED] Candace Owens Challenges Facebook 'Fact-Checker' and Wins: 'They Lied for Democrats'

Share this post:
Steve Quayle Neon Nettle telegram

Facebook is heavily censoring information from independent sources.

To bypass internet censorship, connect with us directly by enabling our notifications (using the red subscription bell in the bottom right corner) or by subscribing to our free daily newsletter.

Get the latest news delivered straight to your inbox for free every day by signing up below.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

NOTICE: It has come to our attention that our commenting platform provider - OpenWeb - has started targetting communities like ours in an attempt to silence conservative voices. Neon Nettle will not stand for this direct attack on the First Amendment. To counter this, we will no longer work with OpenWeb and have reverted to using Disqus for comments. Unfortunately, we may lose old conversations and you may need to sign up for a new account before you can leave a comment.

 

Subscribe to our mailing list

Follow Neon Nettle


PREV
BOOKMARK US
NEXT