Yazılar

US Supreme Court to Hear Case Alleging Cisco Aided China’s Persecution of Falun Gong

/in /tarafından

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear an appeal by Cisco Systems, a case that could narrow the scope of a centuries-old U.S. law used to hold companies liable for human rights abuses committed abroad.

Cisco is challenging a 2023 ruling that revived a lawsuit first filed in 2011, which accuses the California-based technology firm of knowingly developing surveillance technology that enabled the Chinese government to monitor, detain and persecute members of the Falun Gong. The appeal is supported by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump.

The lawsuit is based primarily on the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), a 1789 law that allows foreign plaintiffs to bring civil cases in U.S. courts for violations of international law. Long dormant, the statute has been increasingly tested in recent decades. Cisco is urging the Supreme Court to further limit its reach, arguing that the claims are unfounded and that the company sold technology to China that was legal under U.S. trade policy.

Plaintiffs also allege violations of the Torture Victim Protection Act, claiming Cisco executives “aided and abetted” acts of torture and persecution by Chinese officials. They argue that Cisco helped design and implement the so-called “Golden Shield,” an internet surveillance system used by Chinese authorities to target Falun Gong practitioners and other dissidents.

Falun Gong, founded in China in 1992, combines meditation and moral teachings drawn from Buddhism and Taoism. The Chinese Communist Party banned the movement in 1999 after mass protests in Beijing, labeling it an “evil cult,” and has since detained and imprisoned many of its members. Some plaintiffs allege they were subjected to beatings, electric shocks, sleep deprivation and force-feeding while in custody.

The case was initially dismissed in 2014, with a judge ruling that the alleged conduct lacked a sufficient connection to the United States. However, in 2023, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that plaintiffs had plausibly alleged Cisco provided “essential technical assistance” with awareness that serious human rights violations were likely.

In agreeing to hear the appeal, the Supreme Court said it will focus on whether claims of aiding and abetting can proceed under the Alien Tort Statute and the Torture Victim Protection Act. The court is expected to hear arguments and issue a decision by the end of June.

A Cisco spokesperson welcomed the court’s decision, saying the company looks forward to presenting its case. Lawyers for the

plaintiffs did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

US Supreme Court Grapples with Texas Online Porn Age-Verification Law

/in /tarafından

The U.S. Supreme Court is currently deliberating on a Texas law that mandates online pornographic websites to verify users’ ages to curb minors’ access to adult content. This case is of particular significance as it tests the balance between protecting minors and safeguarding First Amendment rights to free speech.

Legal Background

The case is an appeal from the Free Speech Coalition, a trade group representing adult content creators and distributors, who argue that the law violates free speech rights. The Texas law, enacted in 2023, requires websites with more than one-third of content deemed “sexual material harmful to minors” to verify that users are over 18 before granting access. This includes the submission of personally identifiable information, which the coalition claims could expose adults to risks such as identity theft and data breaches.

The Justices’ Concerns

During oral arguments on Wednesday, justices expressed concerns about both the potential harms to minors and the burden placed on adults. While agreeing that states have a right to protect minors from inappropriate material, some justices, such as conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, questioned the effectiveness of content-filtering measures compared to the age-verification system. Barrett noted the difficulties in ensuring content-filtering technology works consistently across various devices like smartphones, tablets, and gaming systems.

At the same time, some justices voiced concerns about the potential chilling effect of the law on free speech. Derek Shaffer, representing the Free Speech Coalition, argued that the Texas law could make it more difficult and expensive for adults to access constitutionally protected content. He also warned that applying the lower court’s lenient review could pave the way for more regulations that could restrict online speech.

Societal Impact and State’s Defense

The Texas defense team argued that the law is necessary due to the widespread and easy access that children have to harmful pornography through devices. They emphasized the potential long-term societal damage, citing graphic and violent depictions of abuse that children can easily access online. Justice Kavanaugh questioned the Free Speech Coalition’s lawyer, Derek Shaffer, asking whether the societal problems caused by children’s access to pornography could be denied.

Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson raised concerns about the extent to which a state could burden adults with age-verification requirements, questioning whether such mandates could place unreasonable obstacles for users.

Broader Implications

This case is one of several across the country, with 19 similar laws enacted primarily in Republican-led states concerned about the impact of online pornography on minors. While the Supreme Court appears to agree that states can take steps to protect children, the core issue revolves around how these laws intersect with First Amendment protections and the right of adults to access legal content without undue burdens.

The Court is expected to rule on the case by the end of June 2025, with implications not only for online porn regulation but for broader free speech and privacy concerns in the digital age.