Snap refutes the claim made in a scathing lawsuit that suggests it deliberately recommends teenagers’ accounts to predators. According to Snap, the New Mexico attorney general intentionally sought out such accounts before any recommendations were made, accusing the AG of making “gross misrepresentations” and cherry-picking from internal documents.
Snap’s motion to dismiss the case filed on Thursday claims that the AG’s complaint contains “patently false” allegations. The AG’s office created a decoy 14-year-old account as part of an undercover investigation, which the AG alleges Snap violated state laws by misrepresenting the safety of its disappearing messages, enabling abusers to collect and retain exploitative images of minors.
Contrary to the state’s description, Snap claims that investigators were the ones who sent friend requests from the decoy account to targeted usernames like ‘nudedude_22’ and ‘teenxxxxxxx06.’
Snap asserts that it was the government’s decoy account that added an account called “Enzo (Nud15Ans)” and not the other way around, as alleged by the state. The state claims that after connecting with Enzo, Snapchat suggested over 91 users, including adults exchanging sexually explicit content.
Snap also clarifies that it cannot store child sexual abuse material on its servers under federal law and turns over any such content to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children as required.
The New Mexico Department of Justice’s director of communications, Lauren Rodriguez, accuses Snap of evading accountability for harm caused to children on its platform. She claims that Snap has known about the dangers on its platform but failed to act.
The State views Snap’s focus on minor details of the investigation as a distraction from the serious issues raised in the case. The concerns outlined in the complaint remain a pressing concern for young Snapchat users.
Snap seeks to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds that the state’s attempt to mandate age verification and parental controls violates the First Amendment and that Section 230’s legal liability shield should block the suit.
Snap refutes the AG’s claims of misrepresenting its services, stating that catchphrases and aspirational statements do not guarantee the elimination of all risks posed by third parties.
Update, November 21st: Added additional statement from Rodriguez.
