American technology company Snap Inc., Snapchat’s parent company, claims that New Mexico’s bombshell accusations about the company’s failure to protect children have it all backward. In a motion for dismissal, Snap says New Mexico’s Attorney General mischaracterized the company’s alleged shortcomings and committed a shoddy investigation.
The initial lawsuit filed against Snap Inc. in early September alleged that the social media app’s policies and user experience made it illegally straightforward for people to share child sexual abuse materials (CSAM) and created an atmosphere in which people could target and exploit child users.
New Mexico’s Attorney General Raúl Torrez is no stranger to targeting major tech companies for allegedly failing to protect kids. Alongside filing a lawsuit against Snap, Torrez filed a lawsuit against Meta nearly a year ago, alleging that Meta, its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, and individual platforms including Instagram and Facebook, failed to protect children against sexual abuse, online solicitation, and human trafficking.
While Torrez’ September lawsuit against Snap specifically discussed a failure to protect children from sextortion, sexual exploitation, and CSAM, a follow-up press release the following month, which includes an unredacted complaint against Snap, alleges that Snap “knowingly contributed to harm amongst children.” That is a significantly more damning accusation.
“This filing is further confirmation that Snapchat’s harmful design features create an environment that fosters sextortion, sexual abuse and unwanted contact from adults to minors,” Torrez said of the unredacted complaint. “It is disheartening to see that Snap employees have raised many red flags that have continued to be ignored by executives. What is even more disturbing is that unredacted information shows that the addicting features on Snapchat were blatantly acknowledged and encouraged to remain active on the platform. I will always work to hold companies, like Snap and Meta, accountable to create a safer user experience.”
The complete complaint levies many severe accusations against Snap Inc., including that Snap knowingly enabled child sexual exploitation and abuse to occur on its platform.
However, in a motion for dismissal filed this week, Snap alleges that New Mexico’s lengthy investigation has been mischaracterized in the state’s lawsuit and that the lawsuit itself includes inaccuracies.
Snap says New Mexico set up a decoy account and then asked targeted accounts to send encrypted messages, not the other way around, per The Verge. That is quite different from strangers contacting the decoy accounts to solicit encrypted messages.
New Mexico’s lawsuit alleges that its decoy account, “Heather,” was “suggested over 91 users,” including adults seeking sexually explicit content. Snap’s motion calls these allegations “patently false.”
“Contrary to the State’s representations: (1) Plaintiff’s operatives did affirmatively send out many friend requets from ‘Heather’s’ account, including to obviously targeted usernames like ‘nudedude_22,’ ‘teenxxxxxxx06,’ ‘ineedasugardadx,’ and ‘xxx_tradehot’; and (2) it was Plaintiff’s operatives posing as ‘Heather’ who searched for an added ‘Enzo’ as a friend, not the other way around,” Snap’s motion explains, emphasis from the lawsuit filing.
For context, New Mexico’s lawsuit claims Enzo added the decoy account, a claim Snap disputes.
Snap also claims that New Mexico “repeatedly mischaracterizes” the company’s internal communications and failure to save CSAM on its servers as evidence, claiming that it would be illegal to do so while asserting that it does share relevant information to government authorities as mandated.
Further, the company’s dismissal filing explains that the company cannot be compelled to warn children or their parents of any dangers posed by the platform because of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. As part of its overarching protections, the First Amendment is understood to protect an individual or group from coercion to express certain things or make specific speech.
Beyond this purported constitutional protection, Snap adds that it cannot be required to make “subjective judgements about potential risks or harm and disclose them,” and further, “would have to do so with virtually no guidance about how to avoid liability in the future.”
The company adds that New Mexico’s lawsuit violates Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which companies like Google have used to protect themselves against liability incurred by content that users and third parties post online. Section 230 has come under increased scrutiny in recent years, in part because the online landscape has changed significantly since 1996.
“The State’s claims are barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which exempts internet platforms like Snap from liability over the publication of third-party content — e.g., illegal attempts to sextort a user or sell guns or drugs,” Snap’s motion explains.
Snap aims to dismiss the lawsuit “to avoid accountability for the serious harm its platform causes to children,” Lauren Rodriguez, New Mexico Department of Justice director of communications, tells The Verge.
“The evidence we have presented — including internal documents and findings from our investigation — clearly demonstrates that Snap has long known about the dangers on its platform and has failed to act. Rather than addressing these critical issues with real change to their algorithms and design features, Snap continues to put profits over protecting children.”
Rodriguez adds that Snap is attempting to distract from the “serious issues” included in the State’s case against the company and that the alleged harms remain a pressing issue.
Image credits: Header photo licensed via Depositphotos.