Atlanta

3 Cases will Take Time
JeffEng16 22 Reviews 334 reads
posted

Alex--

I apologize my link seemed to break after I put it up and I don't think I can edit it.  There are three  cases as I think you know.  One is referenced in your HuffPo article where BP  appealed a Civil Suit that tries to make it responsible for an alleged sex trafficking case in Pierce County Washington.  The Washington Supreme Court said the CDA does not protect them.  I believe the dissenting Justice was correct, that it will eventually go to the federal trial court and then the Ninth Circuit so it might not be tried in Pierce County Washington or it could be and then appealed back to the  Washington Supreme Court and then go federal.   It's hard to know what will happen and it could take years to resolve.

In the second case, Doe v. Backpage, Ropes and Gray a powerful huge Boston law firm  taking the case pro bono sued BP and its parent Camarillo Holdings on behalf of 3 minors alleging BP and New Times Media LLC set up a business model that promoted child sex trafficking. CA 3 rejected this (Third Circuit Court of Appeals) and Ropes filed en banc (to be heard by all the judges in the 3rd Circuit) and they ruled for BP.  So Ropes has filed a cert. petition to the Supreme Court.  In order for that case to get cert. (into the S.Ct.) it takes a vote of 4 justices.  BP prevailed so far because the CDA (Communications Decency Act) says website providers are immune from liability and the federal district court and the 1st Circuit agreed.  So it will take months for the Supreme Court to decide whether it will take the case.  They take about 72 cases a term, and they get approximately 19-20,000 applications or cert. petitions.  To  complicate things further, right now we have an 8 judge Supreme Court and if they were to split on a case the lower court opinion controls and that case is shut down in the . The next president will probably get a justice confirmed before this case is hear if it is accepted. I don't know what the outcome will be however this is a case about alleged trafficking of 3 minors so it shouldn't impact BP's normal legal operation. The First Circuit concluded that the immunity under the CDA was so broad that immunity applied even if Backpage itself is engaged in criminal conduct, as Ropes & Gray has claimed on behalf of the victims.  If the  Supreme Court takes it, my guess is they will affirm CA1 and immunity will apply. Usually the CDA is interpeted to grant immunity to the internet provider very broadly but there are some courts ruling the other way--not many federal.  So I doubt BP's overall adult legal operation would be impacted. But anything can happen and this case will take months to be heard if it gets in so we'll have to see. The Supreme Court tries very hard to rule narrowly on almost every case, because they impact the whole country. These cases depend on the plaintiffs being able to sell BP as part of the promotion of sex trafficking/and or involving minors,  because that's what all these cases are about.

In the third case Ferrer v. Senate Permanant  Subcommittee on Investigations, the D.C. Circuit widely considereed the most powerful federal circuit because many U.S. agency cases are litigated there and many SCOTUS justices come from it like the Notorious RBG, ruled against BP.  In it, the Senate Homeland Security and Gov Affairs permanant sub on investigation is investigating sex trafficking the theme in all 3 of these cases.  BP refused a subpoena of all their records, and the committee held them in contempt. DC Circuit finally agreed coming down hard on BP so BP has turned to the Supreme Court to get a stay of the contempt order. Yesterday Chief Justice John Roberts issued a stay pending a response from the Senate subcommittee due at noon on 8/9 (tomorrow). This is complicated because BP is accusing the Senate of trying to  use the federal courts as a club against them because the Senate committee doesn't approve of BP.

If the Senate committee thought it uncovered evidence if it gets BP's documents they could refer the situation to DOJ.  

I don't know what the implications will be Alex, but  the biggest problem for BP is probably what happens in the Senate investigation led by former U.S. Attorney Claire McCaskill from Missouri.
Posted By: Alex326
@JeffEng16,  
   
 What do you think the implications will be for the adult 18+ users of Backpage who reside in the U.S. where paid sexual services continue to be illegal? I have posted a link to a HuffPo article over the subject as well.  
   
 "The lawsuit filed in Pierce County Superior Court claimed BackPage.com markets itself as a place to sell "escort services" but actually provides pimps with instructions on how to write an ad that works."  
   
 Furthermore, there are greater implications for those who host adult content in that if BackPage fails to win the suit as it claims it is a mere host and thus protected under Federal from state laws due to the content on the site being produced not by the owners but by the users. If that doesn't hold up states can come after other advertisers and regional boards.  
   
 ...at least that is my read of it...  
   
 Alexandria Fox

There are important implications for Internet content providers and for the digital economy in these 2 cases.

Backpage.com is Challenged on Two Fronts in Supreme Court http://www.nationallawjournal.com/supremecourtbriefhome/id=1202766883659/1 via @TheNLJ

@JeffEng16,

What do you think the implications will be for the adult 18+ users of Backpage who reside in the U.S. where paid sexual services continue to be illegal? I have posted a link to a HuffPo article over the subject as well.  

"The lawsuit filed in Pierce County Superior Court claimed BackPage.com markets itself as a place to sell "escort services" but actually provides pimps with instructions on how to write an ad that works."

Furthermore, there are greater implications for those who host adult content in that if BackPage fails to win the suit as it claims it is a mere host and thus protected under Federal from state laws due to the content on the site being produced not by the owners but by the users. If that doesn't hold up states can come after other advertisers and regional boards.

...at least that is my read of it...

Alexandria Fox

Alex--

I apologize my link seemed to break after I put it up and I don't think I can edit it.  There are three  cases as I think you know.  One is referenced in your HuffPo article where BP  appealed a Civil Suit that tries to make it responsible for an alleged sex trafficking case in Pierce County Washington.  The Washington Supreme Court said the CDA does not protect them.  I believe the dissenting Justice was correct, that it will eventually go to the federal trial court and then the Ninth Circuit so it might not be tried in Pierce County Washington or it could be and then appealed back to the  Washington Supreme Court and then go federal.   It's hard to know what will happen and it could take years to resolve.

In the second case, Doe v. Backpage, Ropes and Gray a powerful huge Boston law firm  taking the case pro bono sued BP and its parent Camarillo Holdings on behalf of 3 minors alleging BP and New Times Media LLC set up a business model that promoted child sex trafficking. CA 3 rejected this (Third Circuit Court of Appeals) and Ropes filed en banc (to be heard by all the judges in the 3rd Circuit) and they ruled for BP.  So Ropes has filed a cert. petition to the Supreme Court.  In order for that case to get cert. (into the S.Ct.) it takes a vote of 4 justices.  BP prevailed so far because the CDA (Communications Decency Act) says website providers are immune from liability and the federal district court and the 1st Circuit agreed.  So it will take months for the Supreme Court to decide whether it will take the case.  They take about 72 cases a term, and they get approximately 19-20,000 applications or cert. petitions.  To  complicate things further, right now we have an 8 judge Supreme Court and if they were to split on a case the lower court opinion controls and that case is shut down in the . The next president will probably get a justice confirmed before this case is hear if it is accepted. I don't know what the outcome will be however this is a case about alleged trafficking of 3 minors so it shouldn't impact BP's normal legal operation. The First Circuit concluded that the immunity under the CDA was so broad that immunity applied even if Backpage itself is engaged in criminal conduct, as Ropes & Gray has claimed on behalf of the victims.  If the  Supreme Court takes it, my guess is they will affirm CA1 and immunity will apply. Usually the CDA is interpeted to grant immunity to the internet provider very broadly but there are some courts ruling the other way--not many federal.  So I doubt BP's overall adult legal operation would be impacted. But anything can happen and this case will take months to be heard if it gets in so we'll have to see. The Supreme Court tries very hard to rule narrowly on almost every case, because they impact the whole country. These cases depend on the plaintiffs being able to sell BP as part of the promotion of sex trafficking/and or involving minors,  because that's what all these cases are about.

In the third case Ferrer v. Senate Permanant  Subcommittee on Investigations, the D.C. Circuit widely considereed the most powerful federal circuit because many U.S. agency cases are litigated there and many SCOTUS justices come from it like the Notorious RBG, ruled against BP.  In it, the Senate Homeland Security and Gov Affairs permanant sub on investigation is investigating sex trafficking the theme in all 3 of these cases.  BP refused a subpoena of all their records, and the committee held them in contempt. DC Circuit finally agreed coming down hard on BP so BP has turned to the Supreme Court to get a stay of the contempt order. Yesterday Chief Justice John Roberts issued a stay pending a response from the Senate subcommittee due at noon on 8/9 (tomorrow). This is complicated because BP is accusing the Senate of trying to  use the federal courts as a club against them because the Senate committee doesn't approve of BP.

If the Senate committee thought it uncovered evidence if it gets BP's documents they could refer the situation to DOJ.  

I don't know what the implications will be Alex, but  the biggest problem for BP is probably what happens in the Senate investigation led by former U.S. Attorney Claire McCaskill from Missouri.

Posted By: Alex326
@JeffEng16,  
   
 What do you think the implications will be for the adult 18+ users of Backpage who reside in the U.S. where paid sexual services continue to be illegal? I have posted a link to a HuffPo article over the subject as well.  
   
 "The lawsuit filed in Pierce County Superior Court claimed BackPage.com markets itself as a place to sell "escort services" but actually provides pimps with instructions on how to write an ad that works."  
   
 Furthermore, there are greater implications for those who host adult content in that if BackPage fails to win the suit as it claims it is a mere host and thus protected under Federal from state laws due to the content on the site being produced not by the owners but by the users. If that doesn't hold up states can come after other advertisers and regional boards.  
   
 ...at least that is my read of it...  
   
 Alexandria Fox

Yes, of course this will take years to reach a resolution and thank you for clarifying the leagalese within everything written about the case.

I don't think this will ultimately impact BP's legal operations. The last thing I read about them is that they are a Netherlands or Belgium based company with servers overseas. They are based where sex work is legal, and if not outright legal in other European countries is not explicitly illegal either.  

I guess what my question is, (pardon the lack of clarity the first time) if the odds end up not in BP's favor in the U.S. will they have to shut down their U.S. adult services section just as Craig's List did? Again, I know this will take many years before a judicial decision is reached but after CL was shut down, it was circulated that BP was next in the war on "sex trafficking". There are several reported cases of women who were killed or went missing this year after meeting with clients from BP (not in GA), and lastly there was the BP serial killer (caught late last year or early part of 2016). I point to that because these are the reasons--just like CL--that FBI's trafficking task force want the site's U.S. operation shut down.

Thanks for your detailed and thoughtful response. This case has been added to my Google news follows.

Alexandria Fox



-- Modified on 9/9/2016 12:39:32 PM

Alex--

If you want to track these cases, National Law Journal www.nationallawjournal.com or @TheNLJ on Twitter is following all 3 of them closely in pretty good detail, possibly better quality/detail/sophistication than most of the local newspapers.  I doubt unless say a Senate investigation were able to get FBI  to pick up pursuit of them with very strong evidence connected to trafficking (after all they are a website strongly protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act) that after these cases play out much is going to change except for some hefty legal fees for some pretty high caliber law firms. BP has already briefed citing the CA of course and showcased reporting they do on trafficking.  

The situations you referenced are chilling, and it goes back to making sure you have solid refs for whomever you see as you are well aware.  I started to say one of them out of Boston was in CA3, but it's CA1-- the one where the pro-bono silk stocking law firm has a cert. petition  pending in the Supreme Court.  

Posted By: Alex326
Yes, of course this will take years to reach a resolution and thank you for clarifying the leagalese within everything written about the case.  
   
 I don't think this will ultimately impact BP's legal operations. The last thing I read about them is that they are a Netherlands or Belgium based company with servers overseas. They are based where sex work is legal, and if not outright legal in other European countries is not explicitly illegal either.  
   
 I guess what my question is, (pardon the lack of clarity the first time) if the odds end up not in BP's favor in the U.S. will they have to shut down their U.S. adult services section just as Craig's List did? Again, I know this will take many years before a judicial decision is reached but after CL was shut down, it was circulated that BP was next in the war on "sex trafficking". There are several reported cases of women who were killed or went missing this year after meeting with clients from BP (not in GA), and lastly there was the BP serial killer (caught late last year or early part of 2016). I point to that because these are the reasons--just like CL--that FBI's trafficking task force want the site's U.S. operation shut down.  
   
 Thanks for your detailed and thoughtful response. This case has been added to my Google news follows.  
   
 Alexandria Fox  
   
 

-- Modified on 9/9/2016 12:39:32 PM

Register Now!