RU version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
100% Positive
Analyzed from 271 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#snap#federal#court#wild#state#doing#government#services#data#legal

Discussion (7 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
For example, is it possible that they were coerced into doing something for the federal government, and they're not allowed to mention it because their speech was stifled with a National Security Letter?
Why Snap is choosing to list it's ties with DHS to get into federal court is confusing - what benefits would Snap get by going to federal?
You've got it backwards: Snap said they were doing the bidding of the DHS and the FDA, and as such, their case belongs in Federal court. It was the court that said "No, you aren't, this is going back to state-level court". Per TFA (quoting State v. Snap, Inc., 2026 WL 2525593 (D. Kansas Aug. 27, 2026)):
> "No doubt, Snap performed some services for federal officers. Some of those services—like advertising on Snapchat—reflect no more than a standard arms-length commercial transaction. Other services, like lens production and custom research, didn’t involve a federal officer’s “strict guidance or control” over Snap. Snap thus has failed to identify any conduct that qualifies it as acting under a federal officer"