Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-1496_d18f.pdf
Page Number: 8.0

2 

TWITTER, INC. v. TAAMNEH 

Opinion of the Court 

and  to  raise  funds  for  terrorism.  Defendants  allegedly
knew that ISIS was using their platforms but failed to stop 
it from doing so.  Plaintiffs accordingly seek to hold Face-
book, Twitter, and Google liable for the terrorist attack that
allegedly injured them.  We conclude, however, that plain-
tiffs’ allegations are insufficient to establish that these de-
fendants  aided  and  abetted  ISIS  in  carrying  out  the  rele-
vant attack. 

I 
Plaintiffs’ case arises from a 2017 terrorist attack on the 
Reina nightclub in Istanbul, Turkey.  The attack was car-
ried out by Abdulkadir Masharipov on behalf of the Islamic 
State  of  Iraq  and  Syria  (ISIS).1   Born  in  Uzbekistan, 
Masharipov  had  received  military  training  with  al  Qaeda
in  Afghanistan  in  2011  and  eventually  became  affiliated
with ISIS.  In 2016, he was ordered by ISIS to travel to Tur-
key and launch an attack in Istanbul on New Year’s Eve.
After planning and coordinating the attack with ISIS emir
Abu Shuhada, Masharipov entered the Reina nightclub in
the  early  hours  of  January  1,  2017,  and  fired  over  120
rounds  into  a  crowd  of  more  than  700  people.  In  total, 
Masharipov  killed  39  people  and  injured  69  others.    The 
next day, ISIS released a statement claiming responsibility 
for the attack.  Two weeks later, Masharipov was arrested
in Istanbul after hiding out in ISIS safe houses. 

One  of  Masharipov’s  victims  was  Nawras  Alassaf,  who 
was killed in the attack.  Several members of Alassaf ’s fam-
ily then brought the present lawsuit under §2333, alleging 
that  they  had  been  injured  by  the  attack.2    Invoking  

—————— 

1 In one form or another, ISIS has been designated a Foreign Terrorist
Organization since 2004; it has also been known as the Islamic State of
Iraq and the Levant, al Qaeda in Iraq, and the al-Zarqawi Network. 

2 Plaintiffs appear to offer several theories as to the nature of their in-
jury; because that question is not before us, we take no position as to any
of those theories.