Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-1284_869d.pdf
Page Number: 1

Cite as:  592 U. S. ____ (2020) 

1 

Statement of THOMAS, J. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

MALWAREBYTES, INC. v. ENIGMA SOFTWARE 
GROUP USA, LLC 

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED 
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

No. 19–1284.  Decided October 13, 2020 

The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. 

  Statement  of  JUSTICE  THOMAS  respecting  the  denial  of 
certiorari. 

This petition asks us to interpret a provision commonly
called §230, a federal law enacted in 1996 that gives Inter-
net  platforms  immunity  from  some  civil  and  criminal 
claims.  47 U. S. C. §230.  When Congress enacted the stat-
ute, most of today’s major Internet platforms did not exist.
And in the 24 years since, we have never interpreted this 
provision.  But many courts have construed the law broadly 
to confer sweeping immunity on some of the largest compa-
nies in the world. 

This case involves Enigma Software Group USA and Mal-
warebytes, two competitors that provide software to enable 
individuals to filter unwanted content, such as content pos-
ing  security  risks.  Enigma  sued  Malwarebytes,  alleging 
that Malwarebytes engaged in anticompetitive conduct by
reconfiguring its products to make it difficult for consumers
to download and use Enigma products.  In its defense, Mal-
warebytes  invoked  a  provision  of  §230  that  states  that  a 
computer service provider cannot be held liable for provid-
ing tools “to restrict access to material” that it “considers to
be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, har-
assing, or otherwise objectionable.”  §230(c)(2).  The Ninth 
Circuit relied heavily on the “policy” and “purpose” of §230
to conclude that immunity is unavailable when a plaintiff
alleges anticompetitive conduct.