Professor Mary Graw Leary of Catholic Law has published a new article in the Villanova Law Review titled "The Failed Experiment of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act: How It Facilitates Exploitation and How It Must Be Reformed." This timely piece comes as Congress evaluates several proposed bills aimed at reforming Section 230, offering critical insights into its flaws and the urgent need for change.

Over the past year, Professor Graw Leary has testified before both the House and Senate on these critical issues. Her article was also entered into the Congressional Record during her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. This work aligns closely with the mission of protecting the dignity and safety of children online, offering valuable insights into the urgent need for reform.

You can read the full article here, and the abstract is provided below.

Abstract

Two truths coexist: The internet has brought with it tremendous changes for learning, connection, and business; and the internet and other digital platforms have led to an unprecedented exploitation of children on a scale never before imagined. This is due in large part to § 230 of the Communications Decency Act—the law which tech platforms have distorted to immunize them from liability for their activity which causes extreme harm. This duality has led to a current vigorous debate about whether this 1996 law has any value in the 21st century.

This Article answers that question with a resounding no, focusing on the issues surrounding child exploitation. It corrects the false argument made by the tech industry in their attempt to redefine § 230’s origin as one singularly focused on internet freedom. This is a false narrative, ignoring the actual context in which § 230 became law: child protection. Given the current state of the internet, Congress should radically address internet regulation, but Congress has failed to act. This Article then makes the case to, at a minimum, reform § 230 and at least return it to its original intent, which would paradoxically update it for the twenty-first century. This Article’s in-depth review of legislative history, historically contemporaneous media coverage from 1996, and tech litigation strategy reveals two facts: (1) § 230 was intended in large part for limited immunity to encourage the protection from child exploitation, and (2) tech plat- forms have systematically litigated throughout the country to expand that immunity to de facto near-absolute immunity, causing massive harm to children.

This Article then compares the intentions and promises behind the law to the present day climate regarding child exploitation on the inter- net, specifically focusing on the problem of Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM)—also known as child pornography. This Piece observes the significant gap between one of § 230’s main purposes and the reality of online child exploitation, emphasizing the urgent need to reform § 230 and restore it to its original intent. It argues that need is prescient not only because of the grave reality of CSAM online, but also because of one of the very intentions behind § 230—to protect children.

After examining recent legislative proposals to address the problem of CSAM and efforts to block them, this Article advances a new solution that restores § 230 to its original purpose, dismantles the false narrative propagated by tech platforms, modernizes § 230 to address contemporary challenges, and charts a potential path toward safeguarding children.