Opinion
NO. 14-19-00845-CV NO. 14-19-00847-CV NO. 14-19-00886-CV
04-28-2020
IN RE FACEBOOK, INC. and Facebook, Inc. d/b/a Instagram, Relators In re Facebook Inc. d/b/a Instagram, Relator
MEMORANDUM MAJORITY OPINION
PER CURIAM
Each plaintiff in the underlying cases is a minor who connected on Facebook or Instagram (collectively, "Facebook") with individuals who forced them into human trafficking. The plaintiffs seek to hold Facebook liable for damages resulting from being victimized by trafficking. Facebook filed a Rule 91a motion to dismiss each plaintiff's case against Facebook based on an immunity provision under a Federal statute known as the Communications Decency Act. See 47 U.S.C. § 230.
See Tex. R. Civ. P. 91a.
Facebook filed two petitions for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221 ; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the first petition filed in our case numbers 14-19-00845-CV and 14-19-00847-CV, Facebook asks this court to compel the Honorable Steven Kirkland, presiding judge of the 334th District Court of Harris County, to set aside his May 23, 2019 orders denying Facebook's Rule 91a motions to dismiss.
In the second petition filed in our case number 14-19-00886-CV, Facebook asks this court to compel the Honorable Mike Engelhart, presiding judge of the 151st District Court of Harris County, to set aside his October 4, 2019 order denying Facebook's Rule 91a motion to dismiss.
Facebook has not established that it is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny Facebook's petitions for writ of mandamus. We also lift our stays issued on November 14, 2019, and November 19, 2019.
( Christopher, J., dissenting).
MEMORANDUM DISSENTING OPINION
Tracy Christopher, Justice
I respectfully dissent from these denials of mandamus and I urge the Texas Supreme Court to review these cases. Federal law grants Facebook immunity from suits such as these. See 47 U.S.C. § 230. Because Facebook has immunity, these suits have no basis in law, and dismissal under Texas Rule of Procedure 91a is proper.
The Real Parties in Interest urge our court to adopt a construction of Section 230 that has been adopted by only a few courts. The vast majority of the courts reviewing this law have adopted the arguments made by Facebook. The artful pleading by the Real Parties in Interest should not prevail over the statute.
Fewer cases discuss the 2018 amendments to Section 230 known as the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017 ("FOSTA"). However, this exception to immunity—on its face—does not apply to a civil action in state court.
Because Facebook has federal statutory immunity from these suits, I respectfully dissent.