Plain-English summary
Court: Plaintiffs’ claims that social platforms aided ISIS fail under the Anti‑Terrorism Act
In Twitter v. Taamneh (2023), the Court unanimously held that plaintiffs’ allegations that social‑media companies aided and abetted ISIS in a terrorist attack did not meet the legal standard in the Anti‑Terrorism Act. The decision reversed the Ninth Circuit and limited when victims can sue platforms for terrorism.
Why this matters
The decision narrows when victims of international terrorism can sue third parties like social‑media companies. It protects common platform activity (hosting content, making algorithms, or allowing accounts) from automatic terrorism liability, while still leaving a path for lawsuits that plausibly allege knowing, substantial assistance specifically linked to an attack.
Who may feel it
- Victims and families of international terrorism
- Social‑media and tech companies (platforms, hosting services)
- Civil plaintiffs’ lawyers suing for terrorism damages
- Policy makers and regulators working on platform accountability
Key questions
- What level of knowledge and assistance is required for a civil "aiding and abetting" claim under the Anti‑Terrorism Act (18 U.S.C. §2333(d)(2))?
- Does providing a widely used platform that a terrorist group can use — without more — count as knowing and substantial assistance to that group's specific terrorist attacks?