Judge: Craigslist not liable for prostitution ads

The question of whether Craigslist is liable for the prostitution ads that can be found on the site appears to have been answered.

(Credit: Greg Sandoval/CNET Networks)

U.S. District Judge John Grady on Tuesday tossed out a civil complaint, filed in March by the sheriff of Illinois' Cook County, which accused Craigslist of being a public nuisance and of violating federal, state and local prostitution laws. Sheriff Tom Dart even alleged in his lawsuit that Craigslist "solicits for a prostitute...by arranging meetings of persons for purposes of prostitution."

If calling Craigslist a pimp seems a stretch, well, that's how Grady saw it too. He listed numerous disagreements he had with Dart's interpretation of the law. Grady's 20-page decision is dense with legal jargon and case-law citations but in the end he simply dismissed Dart's legal arguments.

"Sheriff Dart's lengthy complaint relies heavily on a few conclusory allegations to support the contention that Craigslist induces users to post ads for illegal services," the judge wrote. "Even at this stage of the case we are not required to accept those allegations at face value and they are not meaningfully different from the allegations that our Court of Appeals rejected last year...Sheriff Dart may continue to use Craigslist's Web site to identify and pursue individuals who post allegedly unlawful content...but he cannot sue Craigslist for their conduct."

Craigslist issued a brief response: "We welcome the judge's ruling."

Dart could not immediately be reached for comment.

While Craigslist had been accused in the past of being a large digital bordello, Dart's suit appeared to embolden other law enforcement agencies to challenge the Web's most popular classified service on the issue. Some suspected that Dart and others were using Craigslist to grab headlines.

A few weeks after Dart filed his complaint, the attorney general for the state of South Carolina threatened to launch a criminal investigation against the operators of Craigslist unless it cleaned up the site. Craigslist filed suit against Henry McMaster, the attorney general, and a judge issued an injunction that prevented him from filing criminal charges. McMaster eventually backed down.

It should be noted that the complaints from Dart and other attorneys general prompted Craigslist to make changes. The company did away with the old "erotic" section and created a new "adult" area. The company also hired workers to monitor the adult area to remove anything that failed to meet the site's terms of use.

[opiapr]

Too many stupid DA & Sheriffs bringing ridiculous stupid cases every day.

[Michichael]

Isn't stupidity a job requirement for those people? I have yet to meet a smart cop or one that is more interested in upholding public safety than upholding his paycheck.

[Lerianis3]

Michichael, you are assuming that 'upholding public safety' means that same thing to all people. Personally, as long as someone isn't forcing someone to do something or not do something against their will, stealing from them, or physically harming someone with their permission..... I say the 'law' should butt out and get real and sane.

[nicmart]

Thank goodness for this affirmation of press freedom.

[man_w_balls]

I'm the Sheriff of the Internet, and I'm takin' y'all to jail!

[The_happy_switcher]

Too bad sheriff Lobo, go back to your wife/sis.

[Atlas_]

Another victory for the forces of Chaos and Lawlessness!!!

It's nice when activist judges slow down (and in this case Stop) law enforcement from actually putting criminals behind bars.

acquittal after acquittal after acquittal until the Stench of it RISES up and Chokes us all to HELL.
THAT is the mission, and this brings us one step closer.

[solitare_pax]

But Craigslist had no more control over the contents of what was posed any more than the Republican party can control the outrageous opinions of talking heads on Conservative Radio.

And give them credit - they have taken steps to monitor such activity to try to prevent it.

[cdwilliams1]

Part of the main point here is that craiglist is just on-line classified ads. You can look in your local newspaper or yellow pages and you'll have no problem finding "escort services". Just because craigslist is on-line doesn't mean it should be treated differently. It's funny how when a judge isn't on your side they are an "activist".

[myles taylor]

Give me a break.

Our prisons are breeding grounds for criminals. Sending someone to prison is like sending them to school to be a better criminal or to join a gang.

And while the sex offenders and murderers are walking the streets, we're chasing after these so called criminals who we are making criminals by unreasonable laws. Give me one reason why prostitution should be illegal.

[Michichael]

@myles taylor

Because it's not taxable? :P

Compare prostitution and porn actors job descriptions - one's taxed one's not... one's legal, one's not. :)

[Lerianis3]

We have a WINNER! Michichael gets it EXACTLY RIGHT why prostitution has been made illegal, and I would REALLY like someone to have the guts to say "I am a prostitute, I am proud of it, and I am going to CHALLENGE THESE LAWS!"

Any person who looked at these laws would have to realize that they infringe on NUMEROUS Constitutional protections, and should be declared null and void because of that.

[Pishkado]

I agree that calling Craigslist a pimp is a stretch, but so is the opening sentence of this article: "The question of whether Craigslist is liable for the prostitution ads that can be found on the site appears to have been answered." That's true only in this court's jurisdiction. Different courts often reach different conclusions from the same facts. Until one of those conflicts reaches the U.S. Supreme Court, and that court resolves it (usually changing at least one of the lower rulings in the process) the question hasn't been answered in a general sense.

[mbenedict]

Not all issues need to be contested at the Supreme Court. It doesn't work like that.

This decision is just one from a series of decisions from many courts in many jurisdictions surrounding section 230 of the Communication Decency Act. Basically this section gives immunity from civil suits to information service providers for content supplied by users.

Section 230 has been tried in numerous court cases against not only craigslist but also Google, MySpace, AOL, eBay and others. Nothing in this suit challenges the constitutionality of Section 230 or require fundamental, broad sweeping re-interpretations of the law.

[myles taylor]

When are we just going to drop these ridiculous anti-prostitution laws that don't work, are archaic, and only cause more problems?

[pentest]

About 5 minutes after we take power away from the far right religious extremists, which is to say, probably never.

[thirdstring]

Pretty sure the far-left is running things now. Pretty sure the far right is being suppressed by the White House pretty well these days.

[Dalkorian]

@thirdstring, pretty sure this case is more than 10 months old. I'm constantly amazed at how retarded retardicans really are.

[C0mmanderB0nd]

Good thing for the goverment the judge ruled this way, it maybe a reach but if Craigs list was liable for "arranging for meetings" for prostitution one would have to look at where prostitute found work before Craigs list????

Street corners..... which are the responsibility/property of the government. So really street corners have been as responsible for prostitution as Craigs list!

[krosafcheg]

1. This was about as obvious as it gets.
2. The first person to get into a fervor about something obvious is generally the first person you should be suspicious of. Does Spitzer ring a bell?

[Lerianis3]

Another winner here folks. krosafcheg gets it right, most of the people who are so against various sexual things ARE THOSE THINGS IN QUESTION, even if you are talking about pedosexuality.

[SnidleyWhiplash]

You say the decision is "dense with legal jargon and case citations". Duh! Where's the link to the decision? "a href"... look into it!

[galadan111]

prostitution hurts women

contrary to liberal opinion, prostitution is very damaging to the welfare and well-being of women. Pimps are quite violent, use drugs to force women into the "trade", and usually get all the money. the psychological effects of prostitution are quite terrible, and prostitution in general promotes the use of women as worthless tools or objects rather than as human beings deserving of respect and dignity. "legalization" will not change any of this, it will only change the outward face of an otherwise horrible "profession". even in Vegas, there are many stories of the "Legal" brothels engaging in the subjection of it's "willing" prostitutes, and there is still the health and psychological issues to deal with.

prostitution hurts society

the rates of alcoholism and drug addiction are extremely high among prostitutes. sexually transmitted diseases are rampant among prostitutes. prostitutes generally have much lower life expectancies.

craigslist

the site may not be breaking any laws by allowing the prostitution ads, but it sure does cheapen the site when Craigslist aides and abets the wholesale denigration of women. prostitution is NOT a victimless crime.

i find it truly sad that people support the legalization of prostitution.

[angryinla]

I'm with galadan.....Prostitution and the its supporters only pour salt on wounds of abused victims and addicted sex addicts. Down with Craigslist.