Connect with us

Business

An Algorithm Told Police She Was Safe. Then Her Husband Killed Her.

Published

on

An Algorithm Told Police She Was Safe. Then Her Husband Killed Her.

In a small apartment outside Madrid on Jan. 11, 2022, an argument over household chores turned violent when Lobna Hemid’s husband smashed a wooden shoe rack and used one of the broken pieces to beat her. Her screams were heard by neighbors. Their four children, ages 6 to 12, were also home.

Ms. Hemid’s husband of more than a decade, Bouthaer el Banaisati, regularly punched and kicked her, she later told the police. He also called her a “whore,” “disgusting” and “worthless,” according to the police report.

Before Ms. Hemid left the station that night, the police had to determine if she was in danger of being attacked again and needed support. A police officer clicked through 35 yes or no questions — Was a weapon used? Were there economic problems? Has the aggressor shown controlling behaviors?to feed into an algorithm called VioGén that would help generate an answer.

VioGén produced a score:

low risk Lobna Hemid

Advertisement

2022 Madrid

The police accepted the software’s judgment and Ms. Hemid went home with no further protection. Mr. el Banaisati, who was imprisoned that night, was released the next day. Seven weeks later, he fatally stabbed Ms. Hemid several times in the chest and abdomen before killing himself. She was 32 years old.

A photo of Lobna Hemid on the phone of a friend. She was killed by her husband in 2022.

Ana Maria Arevalo Gosen for The New York Times

Advertisement

Spain has become dependent on an algorithm to combat gender violence, with the software so woven into law enforcement that it is hard to know where its recommendations end and human decision-making begins. At its best, the system has helped police protect vulnerable women and, overall, has reduced the number of repeat attacks in domestic violence cases. But the reliance on VioGén has also resulted in victims, whose risk levels are miscalculated, getting attacked again — sometimes leading to fatal consequences.

Spain now has 92,000 active cases of gender violence victims who were evaluated by VioGén, with most of them — 83 percent — classified as facing little risk of being hurt by their abuser again. Yet roughly 8 percent of women who the algorithm found to be at negligible risk and 14 percent at low risk have reported being harmed again, according to Spain’s Interior Ministry, which oversees the system.

At least 247 women have also been killed by their current or former partner since 2007 after being assessed by VioGén, according to government figures. While that is a tiny fraction of gender violence cases, it points to the algorithm’s flaws. The New York Times found that in a judicial review of 98 of those homicides, 55 of the slain women were scored by VioGén as negligible or low risk for repeat abuse.

How the Risk Levels of 98 Women Were Classified

Extreme

Advertisement

High

Medium

Low

Negligible

Advertisement

Source: Spanish General Council of the Judiciary Note: Data from 2010 to 2022. Data from 2016 to 2018 is unavailable. By Alice Fang

Spanish police are trained to overrule VioGén’s recommendations depending on the evidence, but accept the risk scores about 95 percent of the time, officials said. Judges can also use the results when considering requests for restraining orders and other protective measures.

“Women are falling through the cracks,” said Susana Pavlou, director of the Mediterranean Institute of Gender Studies, who coauthored a European Union report about VioGén and other police efforts to fight violence against women. The algorithm “kind of absolves the police of any responsibility of assessing the situation and what the victim may need.”

Spain exemplifies how governments are turning to algorithms to make societal decisions, a global trend that is expected to grow with the rise of artificial intelligence. In the United States, algorithms help determine prison sentences, set police patrols and identify children at risk of abuse. In the Netherlands and Britain, authorities have experimented with algorithms to predict who may become criminals and to identify people who may be committing welfare fraud.

Few of the programs have such life or death consequences as VioGén. But victims interviewed by The Times rarely knew about the role the algorithm played in their cases. The government also has not released comprehensive data about the system’s effectiveness and has refused to make the algorithm available for outside audit.

Advertisement

VioGén was created to be an unbiased tool to aid police with limited resources identify and protect women most at risk of being assaulted again. The technology was meant to create efficiencies by helping police prioritize the most urgent cases, while focusing less on those calculated by the algorithm as lower risk. Victims classified as higher risk get more protection, including regular patrols by their home, access to a shelter and police monitoring of their abuser’s movements. Those with lower scores get less support.

In a statement, the Interior Ministry defended VioGén and said the government was the “first to carry out self-criticism” when mistakes occur. It said homicide was so rare that it was difficult to accurately predict, but added it was an “incontestable fact” that VioGén has helped reduce violence against women.

Since 2007, about 0.03 percent of Spain’s 814,000 reported victims of gender violence have been killed after being assessed by VioGén, the ministry said. During that time, repeat attacks have fallen to roughly 15 percent of all gender violence cases from 40 percent, according to government figures.

“If it weren’t for this, we would have more homicides and gender-based violence,” said Juan José López Ossorio, a psychologist who helped create VioGén and works for the Interior Ministry.

Juan José López Ossorio, a government official who helped create the VioGén system.

Advertisement

Ana Maria Arevalo Gosen for The New York Times

Yet victims and their families are grappling with the consequences when VioGén gets it wrong.

“Technology is fine, but sometimes it’s not and then it’s fatal,” said Jesús Melguizo, Ms. Hemid’s brother-in-law, who is a guardian for two of her children. “The computer has no heart.”

‘Effective but not perfect’

Advertisement

VioGén started with a question: Can police predict an assault before it happens?

After Spain passed a law in 2004 to address violence against women, the government assembled experts in statistics, psychology and other fields to find an answer. Their goal was to create a statistical model to identify women most at risk of abuse and to outline a standardized response to protect them.

Some initial designs and research strategies for what became VioGén, including a decision tree and calibration techniques for predicting intimate partner homicides.

Ana Maria Arevalo Gosen for The New York Times

Advertisement

“It would be a new guide for risk assessment in gender violence,” said Antonio Pueyo, a psychology professor at the University of Barcelona who later joined the effort.

The team took a similar approach to how insurance companies and banks predict the likelihood of future events, such as house fires or currency swings. They studied national crime statistics, police records and the work of researchers in Britain and Canada to find indicators that appeared to correlate with gender violence. Substance abuse, job loss and economic uncertainty were high on the list.

Then they came up with a questionnaire for victims so their answers could be compared with historical data. Police would fill in the answers after interviewing a victim, reviewing documentary evidence, speaking with witnesses and studying other information from government agencies. Answers to certain questions carried more weight than others, like if an abuser displayed suicidal tendencies or showed signs of jealousy.

These are some of the questions answered by women

6. In the last six months, has there been an escalation of aggression or threats?

YesNoN/A

Advertisement

26. Has the aggressor demonstrated addictive behaviors or substance abuse?

YesNoN/A

34. In the last six months, has the victim expressed to the aggressor her intention to sever their relationship?

Advertisement

YesNoN/A

The system produced a score for each victim: negligible risk, low risk, medium risk, high risk or extreme risk. A higher score would result in police patrols and the tracking of an aggressor’s movements. In extreme cases, police would assign 24-hour surveillance. Those with lower scores would receive fewer resources, mainly follow-up calls.

Predictive algorithms to address domestic violence have been used in parts of Britain, Canada, Germany and the United States, but not on such a national scale. In Spain, the Interior Ministry introduced VioGén everywhere but in the Catalonia region and Basque Country.

Law enforcement initially greeted the algorithm with skepticism, police and government officials told The Times, but it soon became a part of everyday police business.

Advertisement

Before VioGén, investigations were “based on the experience of the policeman,” said Mr. Pueyo, who remains affiliated with the program. “Now this is organized and guided by VioGén.”

VioGén is a source of impartial information, he said. If a woman attacked late at night was seen by a young police officer with little experience, VioGén could help detect the risk of future violence.

“It’s more efficient,” Mr. Pueyo said.

Over the years, VioGén has been refined and updated, including with metrics that are believed to better predict homicide. Police have also been required to conduct a follow-up risk assessment within 90 days of an attack.

But Spain’s faith in the system has surprised some experts. Juanjo Medina, a senior researcher at the University of Seville who has studied VioGén, said the system’s effectiveness remains unclear.

Advertisement

“We’re not good at forecasting the weather, let alone human behavior,” he said.

Francisco Javier Curto, a commander for the military police in Seville, said VioGén helps his teams prioritize, but requires close oversight. About 20 new cases of gender violence arrive every day, each requiring investigation. Providing police protection for every victim would be impossible given staff sizes and budgets.

“The system is effective but not perfect,” he said, adding that VioGén is “the best system that exists in the world right now.”

Francisco Javier Curto, a commander for the military police in Seville who oversees gender violence incidents in the province. VioGén is “the best system that exists in the world right now,” he said.

Ana Maria Arevalo Gosen for The New York Times

Advertisement

José Iniesta, a civil guard in Alicante, a southeastern port city, said not enough of the police are trained to keep up with growing case loads. A leader in the United Association of Civil Guards, a union representing officers in rural areas, he said that outside of big cities, the police often must choose between addressing violence against women or other crimes.

Sindicato Unificado de Policía, a union that represents national police officers, said even the most effective technology cannot make up for a lack of trained experts. In some places, a police officer is assigned to work with more than 100 victims.

“Agents in many provinces are overwhelmed,” the union said in a statement.

When attacks happen again

Advertisement

The women who have been killed after being assessed by VioGén can be found across Spain.

One was Stefany González Escarraman, a 26-year-old living near Seville. In 2016, she went to the police after her husband punched her in the face and choked her. He threw objects at her, including a kitchen ladle that hit their 3-year-old child. After police interviewed Ms. Escarraman for about five hours, VioGén determined she had a negligible risk of being abused again.

negligible risk Stefany González Escarraman

2016 Seville

Advertisement

The next day, Ms. Escarraman, who had a swollen black eye, went to court for a restraining order against her husband. Judges can serve as a check on the VioGén system, with the ability to intervene in cases and provide protective measures. In Ms. Escarraman’s case, the judge denied a restraining order, citing VioGén’s risk score and her husband’s lack of criminal history.

Stefany González Escarraman, who was killed in 2016 by her husband. VioGén had scored her as negligible risk.

About a month later, Ms. Escarraman was stabbed by her husband multiple times in the heart in front of their children. In 2020, her family won a verdict against the state for failing to adequately measure the level of risk and provide sufficient protection.

“If she had been given the help, maybe she would be alive,” said Williams Escarraman, Ms. Escarraman’s brother.

Advertisement

In 2021, Eva Jaular, who lived in Liaño in northern Spain, was slain by her former boyfriend after being classified as low risk by VioGén. He also killed their 11-month-old daughter. Six weeks earlier, he had jabbed a knife into a couch cushion next to where Ms. Jaular sat and said, “look how well it sticks,” according to a police report.

low risk Eva Jaular

2021 Liaño

Since 2007, 247 of the 990 women killed in Spain by a current or former partner were previously scored by VioGén, according to the Interior Ministry. The other victims had not been previously reported to the police, so were not in the system. The ministry declined to disclose the VioGén risk scores of the 247 who were killed.

Advertisement

The Times instead analyzed reports from a Spanish judicial agency, released almost every year from 2010 to 2022, which included information about the risk scores of 98 women who were later killed. Of those, 55 had been classified as negligible risk or low risk.

In a statement, the Interior Ministry said that analyzing the risk scores of homicide victims doesn’t provide an accurate picture of VioGén’s effectiveness because some homicides happened more than a year after the first assessment, while others were committed by a different partner.

Why the algorithm incorrectly classifies some women varies and isn’t always clear, but one reason may be the poor quality of information fed into the system. VioGén is ideally suited for cases when a woman, in the moments after being attacked, can provide complete information to an experienced police officer who has time to fully investigate the incident.

That does not always happen. Fear, shame, economic dependency, immigration status and other factors can lead a victim to withhold information. Police are also often squeezed for time and may not fully investigate.

Elisabeth, a lawyer, is a survivor of gender violence who now advocates for other victims who face institutional mistreatment in Spain.

Advertisement

Ana María Arévalo Gosen for The New York Times

“If we already enter erroneous information into the system, how can we expect the system to give us a good result?” said Elisabeth, a victim who now works as a gender violence lawyer. She spoke on the condition her full name not be used, for fear of retaliation by her former partner.

Luz, a woman from a village in southern Spain, said she was repeatedly labeled low risk after attacks by her partner because she was afraid and ashamed to provide complete information to the police, some of whom she knew personally. She got her risk score increased to extreme only after working with a lawyer specializing in gender violence cases, leading to round-the-clock police protection.

extreme risk Luz

Advertisement

2019 Southern Spain

“We women keep a lot of things silent not because we want to lie but out of fear,” said Luz, who spoke on the condition her full name not be used for fear of retaliation by her attacker, who was imprisoned. “VioGén would be good if there were qualified people who had all the necessary tools to carry it out.”

Luz, with her son, said she was labeled lower risk because she was afraid and ashamed to provide complete information about her partner’s abuse to police.

Ana María Arévalo Gosen for The New York Times

Advertisement

Victim groups said that psychologists or other trained specialists should lead the questioning of victims rather than the police. Some have urged the government to mandate that victims be allowed to be accompanied by somebody they trust to help ensure full information is given to authorities, something that is now not allowed in all areas.

“It’s not easy to report a person you’ve loved,” said María, a victim from Granada in southern Spain, who was labeled medium risk after her partner attacked her with a dumbbell. She asked that her full name not be published for fear of retaliation by him.

medium risk María

2023 Granada

Advertisement

Ujué Agudo, a Spanish researcher studying the influence of artificial intelligence on human decisions, said technology has a role in solving societal problems. But it could reduce the responsibility of humans to approving the work of a machine, rather than conducting the necessary work themselves.

“If the system succeeds, it’s a success of the system. If the system fails, it’s a human error that they aren’t monitoring properly,” said Ms. Agudo, a co-director of Bikolabs, a Spanish civil society group. A better approach, she said, was for people “to say what their decision is before seeing what the A.I. thinks.”

Spanish officials are exploring incorporating A.I. into VioGén so it can pull data from different sources and learn more on its own. Mr. Ossorio, a creator of VioGén who works for the Interior Ministry, said the tools can be applied to other areas, including workplace harassment and hate crimes.

The systems will never be perfect, he said, but neither is human judgment. “Whatever we do, we always fail,” he said. “It’s unsolvable problems.”

Advertisement

This month, the Spanish government called an emergency meeting after three women were killed by former partners within a 24-hour span. One victim, a 30-year-old from central Spain, had been classified by VioGén as low risk.

At a news conference, Fernando Grande-Marlaska, the interior minister, said he still had “absolute confidence” in the system.

‘Always cheerful’

A memorial of roses and eucalyptus adorns a lamppost at the entrance to the street where Ms. Hemid lived.

Ana Maria Arevalo Gosen for The New York Times

Advertisement

Ms. Hemid, who was killed outside Madrid in 2022, was born in rural Morocco. She was 14 when she was introduced at a family wedding to Mr. el Banaisati, who was 10 years older than her. She was 17 when they married. They later moved to Spain so he could pursue steadier work.

Ms. Hemid was outgoing and gregarious, often seen racing to get her children to school on time, friends said. She learned to speak Spanish and sometimes joined children playing soccer in the park.

“She was always cheerful,” said Amelia Franas, a friend whose children went to the same school as Ms. Hemid’s children.

Few knew that abuse was a fixture of Ms. Hemid’s marriage. She spoke little about her home life, friends said, and never called the police or reported Mr. el Banaisati before the January 2022 incident.

Advertisement

VioGén is intended to identify danger signs that humans may overlook, but in Ms. Hemid’s case, it appears that police missed some clues. Her neighbors told The Times they were not interviewed, nor were administrators at her children’s school, who said they had seen signs of trouble.

Family members said Mr. el Banaisati had a life-threatening form of cancer that made him behave erratically. Many blamed underlying discrimination in Spain’s criminal system that overlooks violence against immigrant women, especially Muslims.

Police haven’t released a copy of the assessment that produced Ms. Hemid’s low risk score from VioGén. A copy of a separate police report shared with The Times noted that Ms. Hemid was tired during questioning and wanted to end the interview to get home.

A few days after the January 2022 attack, Ms. Hemid won a restraining order against her husband. But Mr. el Banaisati largely ignored the order, family and friends said. He moved into an apartment less than 500 meters from where Ms. Hemid lived and continued threatening her.

Mr. Melguizo, her brother-in-law, said he appealed to Ms. Hemid’s assigned public lawyer for help, but was told the police “won’t do anything, it has a low risk score.”

Advertisement

The day after Ms. Hemid was stabbed to death, she had a court date scheduled to officially file for divorce.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Business

In Los Angeles, Hotels Become a Refuge for Fire Evacuees

Published

on

In Los Angeles, Hotels Become a Refuge for Fire Evacuees

The lobby of Shutters on the Beach, the luxury oceanfront hotel in Santa Monica that is usually abuzz with tourists and entertainment professionals, had by Thursday transformed into a refuge for Los Angeles residents displaced by the raging wildfires that have ripped through thousands of acres and leveled entire neighborhoods to ash.

In the middle of one table sat something that has probably never been in the lobby of Shutters before: a portable plastic goldfish tank. “It’s my daughter’s,” said Kevin Fossee, 48. Mr. Fossee and his wife, Olivia Barth, 45, had evacuated to the hotel on Tuesday evening shortly after the fire in the Los Angeles Pacific Palisades area flared up near their home in Malibu.

Suddenly, an evacuation alert came in. Every phone in the lobby wailed at once, scaring young children who began to cry inconsolably. People put away their phones a second later when they realized it was a false alarm.

Similar scenes have been unfolding across other Los Angeles hotels as the fires spread and the number of people under evacuation orders soars above 100,000. IHG, which includes the Intercontinental, Regent and Holiday Inn chains, said 19 of its hotels across the Los Angeles and Pasadena areas were accommodating evacuees.

The Palisades fire, which has been raging since Tuesday and has become the most destructive in the history of Los Angeles, struck neighborhoods filled with mansions owned by the wealthy, as well as the homes of middle-class families who have owned them for generations. Now they all need places to stay.

Advertisement

Many evacuees turned to a Palisades WhatsApp group that in just a few days has grown from a few hundred to over 1,000 members. Photos, news, tips on where to evacuate, hotel discount codes and pet policies were being posted with increasing rapidity as the fires spread.

At the midcentury modern Beverly Hilton hotel, which looms over the lawns and gardens of Beverly Hills, seven miles and a world away from the ash-strewed Pacific Palisades, parking ran out on Wednesday as evacuees piled in. Guests had to park in another lot a mile south and take a shuttle back.

In the lobby of the hotel, which regularly hosts glamorous events like the recent Golden Globe Awards, guests in workout clothes wrestled with children, pets and hastily packed roll-aboards.

Many of the guests were already familiar with each other from their neighborhoods, and there was a resigned intimacy as they traded stories. “You can tell right away if someone is a fire evacuee by whether they are wearing sweats or have a dog with them,” said Sasha Young, 34, a photographer. “Everyone I’ve spoken with says the same thing: We didn’t take enough.”

The Hotel June, a boutique hotel with a 1950s hipster vibe a mile north of Los Angeles International Airport, was offering evacuees rooms for $125 per night.

Advertisement

“We were heading home to the Palisades from the airport when we found out about the evacuations,” said Julia Morandi, 73, a retired science educator who lives in the Palisades Highlands neighborhood. “When we checked in, they could see we were stressed, so the manager gave us drinks tickets and told us, ‘We take care of our neighbors.’”

Hotels are also assisting tourists caught up in the chaos, helping them make arrangements to fly home (as of Friday, the airport was operating normally) and waiving cancellation fees. A spokeswoman for Shutters said its guests included domestic and international tourists, but on Thursday, few could be spotted among the displaced Angelenos. The heated outdoor pool that overlooks the ocean and is usually surrounded by sunbathers was completely deserted because of the dangerous air quality.

“I think I’m one of the only tourists here,” said Pavel Francouz, 34, a hockey scout who came to Los Angeles from the Czech Republic for a meeting on Tuesday before the fires ignited.

“It’s weird to be a tourist,” he said, describing the eerily empty beaches and the hotel lobby packed with crying children, families, dogs and suitcases. “I can’t imagine what it would feel like to be these people,” he said, adding, “I’m ready to go home.”


Follow New York Times Travel on Instagram and sign up for our weekly Travel Dispatch newsletter to get expert tips on traveling smarter and inspiration for your next vacation. Dreaming up a future getaway or just armchair traveling? Check out our 52 Places to Go in 2025.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Business

Downtown Los Angeles Macy's is among 150 locations to close

Published

on

Downtown Los Angeles Macy's is among 150 locations to close

The downtown Los Angeles Macy’s department store, situated on 7th Street and a cornerstone of retail in the area, will shut down as the company prepares to close 150 underperforming locations in an effort to revamp and modernize its business.

The iconic retail center announced this week the first 66 closures, including nine in California spanning from Sacramento to San Diego. Stores will also close in Florida, New York and Georgia, among other states. The closures are part of a broader company strategy to bolster sustainability and profitability.

Macy’s is not alone in its plan to slim down and rejuvenate sales. The retailer Kohl’s announced on Friday that it would close 27 poor performing stores by April, including 10 in California and one in the Los Angeles neighborhood of Westchester. Kohl’s will also shut down its San Bernardino e-commerce distribution center in May.

“Kohl’s continues to believe in the health and strength of its profitable store base” and will have more than 1,100 stores remaining after the closures, the company said in a statement.

Macy’s announced its plan last February to end operations at roughly 30% of its stores by 2027, following disappointing quarterly results that included a $71-million loss and nearly 2% decline in sales. The company will invest in its remaining 350 stores, which have the potential to “generate more meaningful value,” according to a release.

Advertisement

“We are closing underproductive Macy’s stores to allow us to focus our resources and prioritize investments in our go-forward stores, where customers are already responding positively to better product offerings and elevated service,” Chief Executive Tony Spring said in a statement. “Closing any store is never easy.”

Macy’s brick-and-mortar locations also faced a setback in January 2024, when the company announced the closures of five stores, including the location at Simi Valley Town Center. At the same time, Macy’s said it would layoff 3.5% of its workforce, equal to about 2,350 jobs.

Farther north, Walgreens announced this week that it would shutter 12 stores across San Francisco due to “increased regulatory and reimbursement pressures,” CBS News reported.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

The justices are expected to rule quickly in the case.

Published

on

The justices are expected to rule quickly in the case.

When the Supreme Court hears arguments on Friday over whether protecting national security requires TikTok to be sold or closed, the justices will be working in the shadow of three First Amendment precedents, all influenced by the climate of their times and by how much the justices trusted the government.

During the Cold War and in the Vietnam era, the court refused to credit the government’s assertions that national security required limiting what newspapers could publish and what Americans could read. More recently, though, the court deferred to Congress’s judgment that combating terrorism justified making some kinds of speech a crime.

The court will most likely act quickly, as TikTok faces a Jan. 19 deadline under a law enacted in April by bipartisan majorities. The law’s sponsors said the app’s parent company, ByteDance, is controlled by China and could use it to harvest Americans’ private data and to spread covert disinformation.

The court’s decision will determine the fate of a powerful and pervasive cultural phenomenon that uses a sophisticated algorithm to feed a personalized array of short videos to its 170 million users in the United States. For many of them, and particularly younger ones, TikTok has become a leading source of information and entertainment.

As in earlier cases pitting national security against free speech, the core question for the justices is whether the government’s judgments about the threat TikTok is said to pose are sufficient to overcome the nation’s commitment to free speech.

Advertisement

Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, told the justices that he “is second to none in his appreciation and protection of the First Amendment’s right to free speech.” But he urged them to uphold the law.

“The right to free speech enshrined in the First Amendment does not apply to a corporate agent of the Chinese Communist Party,” Mr. McConnell wrote.

Jameel Jaffer, the executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, said that stance reflected a fundamental misunderstanding.

“It is not the government’s role to tell us which ideas are worth listening to,” he said. “It’s not the government’s role to cleanse the marketplace of ideas or information that the government disagrees with.”

The Supreme Court’s last major decision in a clash between national security and free speech was in 2010, in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project. It concerned a law that made it a crime to provide even benign assistance in the form of speech to groups said to engage in terrorism.

Advertisement

One plaintiff, for instance, said he wanted to help the Kurdistan Workers’ Party find peaceful ways to protect the rights of Kurds in Turkey and to bring their claims to the attention of international bodies.

When the case was argued, Elena Kagan, then the U.S. solicitor general, said courts should defer to the government’s assessments of national security threats.

“The ability of Congress and of the executive branch to regulate the relationships between Americans and foreign governments or foreign organizations has long been acknowledged by this court,” she said. (She joined the court six months later.)

The court ruled for the government by a 6-to-3 vote, accepting its expertise even after ruling that the law was subject to strict scrutiny, the most demanding form of judicial review.

“The government, when seeking to prevent imminent harms in the context of international affairs and national security, is not required to conclusively link all the pieces in the puzzle before we grant weight to its empirical conclusions,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority.

Advertisement
Elena Kagan was the U.S. solicitor general the last time a major decision in a clash between national security and free speech came up in a Supreme Court case, in 2010.Credit…Luke Sharrett/The New York Times

In its Supreme Court briefs defending the law banning TikTok, the Biden administration repeatedly cited the 2010 decision.

“Congress and the executive branch determined that ByteDance’s ownership and control of TikTok pose an unacceptable threat to national security because that relationship could permit a foreign adversary government to collect intelligence on and manipulate the content received by TikTok’s American users,” Elizabeth B. Prelogar, the U.S. solicitor general, wrote, “even if those harms had not yet materialized.”

Many federal laws, she added, limit foreign ownership of companies in sensitive fields, including broadcasting, banking, nuclear facilities, undersea cables, air carriers, dams and reservoirs.

While the court led by Chief Justice Roberts was willing to defer to the government, earlier courts were more skeptical. In 1965, during the Cold War, the court struck down a law requiring people who wanted to receive foreign mail that the government said was “communist political propaganda” to say so in writing.

That decision, Lamont v. Postmaster General, had several distinctive features. It was unanimous. It was the first time the court had ever held a federal law unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s free expression clauses.

Advertisement

It was the first Supreme Court opinion to feature the phrase “the marketplace of ideas.” And it was the first Supreme Court decision to recognize a constitutional right to receive information.

That last idea figures in the TikTok case. “When controversies have arisen,” a brief for users of the app said, “the court has protected Americans’ right to hear foreign-influenced ideas, allowing Congress at most to require labeling of the ideas’ origin.”

Indeed, a supporting brief from the Knight First Amendment Institute said, the law banning TikTok is far more aggressive than the one limiting access to communist propaganda. “While the law in Lamont burdened Americans’ access to specific speech from abroad,” the brief said, “the act prohibits it entirely.”

Zephyr Teachout, a law professor at Fordham, said that was the wrong analysis. “Imposing foreign ownership restrictions on communications platforms is several steps removed from free speech concerns,” she wrote in a brief supporting the government, “because the regulations are wholly concerned with the firms’ ownership, not the firms’ conduct, technology or content.”

Six years after the case on mailed propaganda, the Supreme Court again rejected the invocation of national security to justify limiting speech, ruling that the Nixon administration could not stop The New York Times and The Washington Post from publishing the Pentagon Papers, a secret history of the Vietnam War. The court did so in the face of government warnings that publishing would imperil intelligence agents and peace talks.

Advertisement

“The word ‘security’ is a broad, vague generality whose contours should not be invoked to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment,” Justice Hugo Black wrote in a concurring opinion.

The American Civil Liberties Union told the justices that the law banning TikTok “is even more sweeping” than the prior restraint sought by the government in the Pentagon Papers case.

“The government has not merely forbidden particular communications or speakers on TikTok based on their content; it has banned an entire platform,” the brief said. “It is as though, in Pentagon Papers, the lower court had shut down The New York Times entirely.”

Mr. Jaffer of the Knight Institute said the key precedents point in differing directions.

“People say, well, the court routinely defers to the government in national security cases, and there is obviously some truth to that,” he said. “But in the sphere of First Amendment rights, the record is a lot more complicated.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending