WASHINGTON — The plaintiffs in the Woodhull Freedom Foundation case challenging FOSTA/SESTA filed on Monday a motion asking the D.C. district court for a summary judgment declaring the legislation unconstitutional.
FOSTA, the Woodhull legal team argued, is "unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, is a content-based statute that cannot satisfy strict scrutiny and lacks the necessary scienter [i.e., proof of intent] requirements to be constitutional, and it explicitly is meant to have retroactive reach in both its criminal and civil applications.”
The plaintiffs requested from the court “a declaratory ruling that FOSTA is unconstitutional and a permanent injunction against its enforcement and application.”
FOSTA-SESTA was drafted by religiously motivated Midwestern Republicans and sold to Democratic members of Congress — most famously to current Vice Presidential candidate Kamala Harris — as "an anti-human trafficking measure."
One of Woodhull’s attorneys, Lawrence Walters of Walters Law Group, told XBIZ that “this motion is an important step towards declaring FOSTA unconstitutional.”
“We have outlined all the reasons why FOSTA violates the First and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution and should be struck down,” Walters continued. “The Government filed its own motion defending FOSTA. Both sides will file their opposition papers and then it will be up to the district court to decide FOSTA’s fate."
"The plaintiffs and their legal team are committed to fighting this harmful law which invites censorship and harms sex workers," Walters told XBIZ.
To read the Woodhull Foundation statement on the motion, click here.
