Kentucky attorney general takes on Discord over child safety

Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman is once again participating in a legal dispute involving child welfare and Big Tech.

This time, the center of concern for the highest attorney in the Commonwealth is a debated federal rule used in a federal lawsuit from Jane Doe, an Ohio girl who alleged she was coerced by a predator into sending explicit images on the social platform Discord.

The suit, Jane Doe vs. Discord, accused Discord of lying about its safety features, such as not verifying users ages or identities. It was dismissed with prejudice in April 2026 in favor of Discord. The federal trial court found the social platform was not liable for the alleged predator's actions based on a federal rule known as Section 230. Social platforms have used the 30-year-old rule as an immunity shield, according to court records.

The case is now on appeal with the United States Sixth Circuit, whose jurisdiction includes Kentucky.

Coleman filed an amicus curiae, or brief, Oct. 29 asking the court of appeals to reverse the lower court ruling that, Coleman said, "misconstrued" Section 230, arguing that it "hampers" a state's attorney general in their ability to stop child sexual abuse on social media.

"There couldn't be a worse time to tie the hands of the States in this area," the brief stated.

Coleman's involvement in the Ohio case comes two months after the Commonwealth and several other states agreed to a landmark settlement with Meta, the parent company of Instagram and Facebook, regarding social media safety for children.

Coleman, a Republican, led the Meta litigation along with the attorneys general for California, Colorado and New Jersey, making it a bipartisan effort. Twenty-five other states were also involved in the lawsuit.

"The online protections delivered by this settlement will bring a generational change that will make social media platforms safer for Kentucky families," Coleman said in an August release about the $17.1 billion settlement with Meta, under which Kentucky will receive $358 million.

In its Jane Doe vs. Discord decision, the lower court barred the claims of Ohio's minor survivor of sexual exploitation under Section 230. Doe's lawyers argue that the lower court "construed 230 very expansively."

Congress made calls in both 2025 and 2026 to sunset, or even amend, Section 230.

Any decision made by the U.S. Sixth Circuit binds all states in the circuit, which is made up of Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee and Kentucky, which means the case brought forward by Ohio's Doe could affect millions of children. The other state attorneys general in the circuit signed Coleman's brief, arguing Section 230 does not "immunize" Discord and any other social media platform from "all liability."

Section 230 is a portion of the Communications Decency Act.

Congress passed the rule as part of the Telecommunications Act in 1996 as the dot-com bubble grew. The Communications Decency Act attempted "to prevent minors from gaining access to sexually explicit material," according to the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University. It marked the first legislative attempt to regulate "obscene or indecent" messages transmitted to someone under age 18.

Section 230 provided immunity to internet service providers who removed or screened obscene or indecent material posted to their sites by third parties, according to the Free Speech Center.

Pat Huyett, Doe's lawyer and a partner at the Pennsylvania-based firm Anapol Weiss, said Congress created Section 230 to protect kids and it "morphed" into an immunity tool for online platforms.

"Basically, any type of legal claims touching or involving third-party content, these platforms said those claims are barred by 230," Huyett told The Courier Journal. "For many years, courts agreed with that and expansively construed 230."

But in the last five years, courts in Texas, Iowa and Tennessee have all ruled that Section 230 does not grant complete immunity or "claims like those that are at issue here," Huyett said.

"In the last five years, courts have really stopped to think, 'Well, what is Section 230 actually saying?'" Huyett said. "How the appellate court resolves this will affect (attorneys' general) enforcement efforts of online platforms."

What does the Kentucky AG's brief say?

Coleman is joined by the attorneys general from Ohio, Michigan and Tennessee on the brief, which argues that child sex abuse is pervasive on social media platforms. The brief cites a finding from Crimes Against Children Research Center that says one in six children is currently a victim of online sex abuse.

Discord is an online communication platform typically used by gamers to chat while playing online games, like Roblox. While Roblox is not named in Doe's suit, Coleman filed a civil enforcement lawsuit against the company in October 2025, accusing the platform of acting as a "hunting ground for child predators."

"The abuse that children face is not merely virtual," the Oct. 29 brief states. "Extremist 'sextortion' groups like '764' have members operating in Kentucky, where they use platforms like Roblox to recruit, groom, extort, threaten and even conspire to kill children as young as eight years old."

Discord did not respond to a request for comment.

Last October, Coleman filed suit against Roblox, an online gaming platform, alleging similar misrepresentations about safety and design of its platform.

"Kentucky's case against Roblox and Doe's case here are just two examples of Section 230 being weaponized as an obstacle to the States in combating child sexual abuse," the brief argued. "By (wrongly) interpreting Section 230 broadly, some courts have inhibited the ability of private parties and States to hold these companies accountable through tort liability and unfair-trade-practices laws."

Did anyone else file a brief?

The National Center on Sexual Exploitation also filed an amicus curiae with the Sixth Circuit, stating that "Section 230 has been wrongly applied in a way that undermines its original purpose, giving social media companies, rather than children, broad online protections."

"The Court should take this opportunity to remind litigants in this circuit that Section 230 means what its statutory text says, and nothing more," the brief argued.

What happens next in the appeals case?

Discord has 30 days to respond to Doe's attorney's claims in the appeals court. Once that reply is filed, amicus briefs for Discord can be filed for seven days.

Statehouse reporter Keely Doll contributed to this report. Stephanie Kuzydym is an enterprise and investigative sports reporter. Reach her at [email protected].