Communications Daily is a service of Warren Communications News.

Durbin Looks to Move Reintroduced CDA S. 230 Bill

Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., reintroduced the Earn It Act Monday, as expected (see 2105180041). The bill removes “blanket immunity” under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act for violations of law on online child sexual abuse…

Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article

Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!

material. The Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously passed the bill in 2020 (see 2007020050). Asked about committee consideration for the reintroduced bill, Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., told us Tuesday: "Soon." Tech platforms would no longer have immunity from federal civil, state criminal and state civil child sexual abuse material laws. The bill establishes a national commission headed by leaders of DOJ, the FTC, DHS and other congressionally appointed members. The commission would establish voluntary best practices. Reps. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., and Sylvia Garcia, D-Texas, are introducing companion legislation. The bill would restore victims’ privacy, said the National Center on Sexual Exploitation. CEO Dawn Hawkins said tech companies don’t currently have “incentive to prevent or eliminate CSAM.” Section 230 isn’t a barrier to federal prosecution of companies that fail to combat illegal material, said Computer & Communications Industry Association President Matt Schruers: “Enforcing existing criminal statutes in known cases would prevent more crime than placing a federal committee in control of how Internet services police content.” The bill, as originally written and reintroduced, “threatens encryption, privacy, and the Constitution,” said NetChoice Vice President Carl Szabo: It gives a “get-out-of-jail-free” card to those “credibly accused of child exploitation,” and its sponsors haven’t addressed “serious Fourth Amendment problems that would give criminal defendants yet another means to challenge their CSAM convictions.”