Case Summary
**Case Summary: Backpage.com, LLC v. Thomas Dart**
**Docket Number:** 3012564
**Court:** United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
**Date:** 2016
**Overview:**
Backpage.com, LLC, a classified advertising website, filed a lawsuit against Thomas Dart, the Cook County Sheriff, challenging the constitutionality of an ordinance that effectively targeted their business operations concerning adult advertisements. The case raised significant First Amendment issues regarding free speech and the implications of government actions on online platforms.
**Background:**
Backpage.com operated a section for adult services that included classified advertisements for escorts and other adult-related services. In 2013, Sheriff Dart publicly reprimanded Backpage.com for facilitating illegal activities and sought to enforce a new ordinance requiring that all online platforms providing advertisements for “adult entertainment” must verify and confirm the legitimacy of the content, essentially placing a burden on them that was argued to be overly restrictive.
Backpage.com claimed that the ordinance was unconstitutional, as it violated their First Amendment rights by limiting free speech and imposing undue burdens on their business operations.
**Legal Issues:**
1. **First Amendment Rights:** The core issue revolved around whether the ordinance constituted a violation of the First Amendment by infringing on the free speech rights of Backpage.com and its users.
2. **Equal Protection Clause:** The case also examined whether the ordinance was applied in a discriminatory manner, targeting Backpage.com unfairly compared to other similar platforms.
**Decision:**
The District Court ruled in favor of Backpage.com, finding that the ordinance imposed significant and unjustifiable restrictions on free speech. The court emphasized that online platforms should not be held liable for the content posted by third parties and that the government could not impose excessive burdens on their ability to facilitate expressions of speech.
The ruling highlighted the importance of protecting online platforms from potential overreach by governmental authorities, affirming that while the state had a legitimate interest in combating illegal activities, this interest did not warrant the suppression of protected speech under the First Amendment.
**Conclusion:**
The case of Backpage.com, LLC v. Thomas Dart underscored the ongoing legal debates surrounding free speech, internet governance, and the responsibility of online platforms in moderating content. The outcome preserved a critical aspect of First Amendment protections, reinforcing that governmental actions must navigate carefully to avoid infringing on the rights of individuals and businesses in the digital space.