Supreme Court hears arguments on social media liability

We're just seeking for justice. The Gonzalez family says they want to change the Internet for the better. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments for their case against Google. They say the social media giant is partially responsible for the ISIS terrorist attack that killed their daughter because YouTube system recommended more ISIS extremist content when users showed interest. There's a lot of innocent people that went when we went through and it is very very difficult. Their attorney is seeking to chip away from the crime. They're seeking to chip away at a 1996 law known as Section 230 that shields online companies from being sued for third party content posted to their website.

But inside the court, both conservative and liberal justices struggle to understand the plaintiff's argument. Justice Sonia Sotomayor suggested the case lacks proof. Google's algorithms were specifically used to boost ISIS messages. There has to be some intense aid in a bed. You have to have knowledge that you're doing this and Chief Justice John Robert says changing the law could make websites targets of endless lawsuits. Many many times more than a defamation suits, discrimination suits. Google's defense lawyers insisted their algorithms are neutral and performed the same way regardless of the type of content someone watches.

Some justices suggested Congress, not the court, is better suited to iron out the details of Section 230. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear a related case filed against Twitter in Washington, Raquel Martin.

WOODTV, News 8, Nexstar, West Michigan, Michigan, News at 5, News at 6, News at 10, News at 11, The Seven, Emily Linnert, Donovan Long, Susan Shaw, Brian Sterling, Michele DeSelms, Brittany Flowers, Teresa Weakley, Amanda Porter