DC Court Upholds FOSTA-SESTA, Rejects Free-Speech Challenge

DC Court Upholds FOSTA-SESTA, Rejects Free-Speech Challenge

WASHINGTON — The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia rejected a legal challenge to FOSTA-SESTA presented by First Amendment and free speech advocates, ruling that the U.S. government can continue enforcing the controversial legislation.

The court found on Tuesday that FOSTA-SESTA “is neither overly broad nor unduly vague,” Bloomberg Law reported today.

As XBIZ reported, Woodhull Freedom Foundation, Human Rights Watch, Internet Archive and two webmasters sued the U.S. government to challenge the much-criticized carve-out of Section 230, allegedly passed to "help fight human trafficking." The plaintiffs are represented by Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Electronic Frontier Foundation and Walters Law Group.

FOSTA-SESTA was drafted by religiously-motivated Midwestern Republicans and sold to Democratic members of Congress — most famously now-VP Kamala Harris — as "an anti-human trafficking measure." However, since Donald Trump signed it into law in April 2018, FOSTA has had null-to-negative effect in the fight against actual human trafficking in the U.S. In June 2021, confirming what the vast majority of sex workers and advocates had warned about in 2017 and 2018, the FBI told the Government Accountability Office that its “ability to identify and locate sex trafficking victims and perpetrators was significantly decreased following the takedown of Backpage.com.”

FOSTA-SESTA, the court ruled Tuesday, “doesn’t violate the First Amendment because it doesn’t discriminate against speech based on its content or viewpoint,” Bloomberg Law reported. “And the law gives sufficient notice of the type of conduct it prohibits to survive a Fifth Amendment void-for-vagueness challenge.”

In the opinion of Judge Richard J. Leon, FOSTA “is narrowly tailored to encompass only legitimate criminal activity, not a substantial portion of protected speech, and gives adequate notice of what conduct it prohibits.”

“The plaintiffs are aware of the decision,” Walters Law Group’s Larry Walters told XBIZ. “While we are naturally disappointed with the ruling, we are committed to appealing the dismissal and continuing the constitutional challenge to FOSTA-SESTA.”

The case is Woodhull Freedom Found. v. United States, D.D.C., No. 18-cv-1552.

Copyright © 2025 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More News

ImLive Launches Revamped Member Loyalty Program

Cam platform ImLive has revamped its member loyalty program.

GoFundMe Set Up for Danny Ferretti's Medical Expenses

A GoFundMe campaign has been set up for Fangear founder Danny Ferretti, who requires extensive lung surgery.

Byborg Acquires Cuties AI

Byborg Enterprises has acquired adult artificial intelligence startup Cuties AI.

Irish Government Releases Report on Sex Work Decriminalization Legislation

The Irish government has released a report reviewing a 2017 law that decriminalized sex work across the country.

Texas Bill Would Require Age Verification for Online Sex Toy Sales

A new bill in the Texas state legislature would require online retailers to implement age verification of purchasers before selling “obscene devices” to anyone in that state.

New York Assemblyman Proposes Banning the Term 'Sex Work'

Republican New York Assembly Member Brian Maher has introduced a bill to prohibit the use of the term "sex work" in government documents.

Age Verification Watch: Michigan Joins the AV Club, Some Laws Just Make No Sense

This roundup provides an update on the latest news and developments on the age verification front as it impacts the adult industry.

Free Speech Groups Back SCOTUS Appeal of Georgia Strip Club Tax

Two civil liberties organizations filed an amicus brief Tuesday supporting a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an appeal in a case involving whether a tax specifically aimed at adult entertainment establishments violates the First Amendment.

Creator Networking App 'Plaiir' Launches

Plaiir, a mobile networking app for creators, has officially launched.

Swedish Court Rules LELO Products Do Not Infringe 'Invalid' Satisfyer Patent

A Swedish district court has ruled that a patent filed by Satisfyer parent company EIS GmbH is not valid, and therefore three products from pleasure brand LELO are not in violation.

Show More