Ahead of Wednesday’s House hearing on Section 230, Chamber of Progress submitted a statement for the record urging lawmakers to first review the impact of prior changes to Section 230 under SESTA/FOSTA before forging ahead with new carve outs to the law. 

Chamber of Progress urged leaders on the Energy & Commerce Committee to consider the SAFE SEX Workers Study Act, a bill requiring the Department of Health and Human Services to conduct the first federal study on the health and safety of sex workers and to examine the unintended consequences of SESTA/FOSTA.  

The organization also noted that as a result of SESTA/FOSTA, service providers who take proactive steps to address child sexual abuse imagery and trafficking content are finding that their efforts are being used against them to support arguments by plaintiffs that they have constructive knowledge of trafficking activity.

Read Chamber of Progress’s statement for the record.

“The last time Congress tinkered with Section 230, they kicked sex workers to the curb and disincentivized platforms from rooting out child abuse,:” said Chamber of Progress CEO Adam Kovacevich. “Section 230 isn’t a weapon for punishing Facebook, it’s a law that makes the Internet safer and healthier for everyone. Congress should study the impact of their last 230 change before making any new changes.” 

In January, more than 70 organizations sent a letter to lawmakers urging passage of the SAFE SEX Workers Study Act and warning against more disastrous changes to Section 230. Advocates for sex workers and tech policy experts have argued against further attempts to gut Section 230, pointing to SESTA/FOSTA’s failures and the potential harms created by additional carve outs.

###

Chamber of Progress (progresschamber.org) is a new center-left tech industry policy coalition promoting technology’s progressive future. We work to ensure that all Americans benefit from technological leaps, and that the tech industry operates responsibly and fairly.

Our corporate partners do not have a vote on or veto over our positions. We do not speak for individual partner companies and remain true to our stated principles even when our partners disagree.