FOSTA Lawsuit: Government Responds to Woodhull’s Appeal (YNOT)

Read the full article by Gene Zorkin at YNOT.com

WASHINGTON – In a brief filed last week, attorneys for the U.S. government reiterated their assertion that the plaintiffs in Woodhull Freedom Foundation v. U.S. – a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (“FOSTA”) – all lack standing to challenge the Act, because they don’t “face a credible threat of prosecution” under the law.

It’s to be expected that the government would largely restate the same arguments it made in district court, since the district court concurred with the defense arguments, dismissed Woodhull’s complaint and denied the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of FOSTA. The government doesn’t need to make any new arguments; it just needs to persuade the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that the same arguments it has already made should prevail and that the district court did not err in dismissing the complaint.

“The district court denied plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction and dismissed the complaint, finding that plaintiffs lacked standing because they did not face a credible threat of prosecution as a result of FOSTA,” the government stated in its brief. “The district court noted several ‘key textual indications that make clear that FOSTA targets specific acts of illegal prostitution – not the abstract topic of prostitution or sex work,’ and thus did not apply to plaintiffs’ intended activities.”