This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

May 25, 2017

Kristin A. Linsley

See more on Kristin A. Linsley

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP San Francisco

Kristin A. Linsley

Linsley represents Facebook Inc. in federal actions arising from terrorist attacks. The plaintiffs have invoked the federal Anti-Terrorism Act to hold social media companies liable for deaths and injuries in the Paris ISIS attack; the Orlando, Florida Pulse nightclub attack; and the Dallas police shootings.

Heirs of an American victim of the Paris attacks, Nohemi Gonzalez, allege ISIS members and sympathizers used the defendants' service to build and strengthen their organization, enabling ISIS to commit the attacks. "Without defendants Twitter, Facebook and Google [YouTube], the explosive growth of ISIS over the last few years into the most-feared terrorist group in the world would not have been possible," the complaint states. Gonzalez v. Twitter Inc., 4:16-cv-03282 (N.D. Cal., filed June 15, 2016).

Heirs of three victims of the Orlando shooting allege Omar Mateen, the attacker, was self-radicalized through ISIS propaganda he viewed online. Crosby v. Twitter Inc., 2:16-cv-14406 (E.D. Mich., filed Dec. 20, 2016).

In a third case, a first responder to the Dallas police shootings, a police sergeant, asserts organizations that allegedly supported the shootings, including Black Lives Matter, were infiltrated and/or influenced by Hamas, a U.S.-designated terrorist organization. The complaint claims Facebook and other defendants provided material support for Hamas by permitting sympathizers to post content and failing to remove content that supported terrorist acts or groups. Pennie v. Twitter Inc., 3:17-cv-00230 (N.D. Cal., filed Jan. 18, 2017).

"We think these claims are largely barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which holds that no online service shall be treated as a publisher of third party content," Linsley said.

— John Roemer

#301558

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com