18 U.S.C. § 2258D

Limited liability for NCMEC

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)In General.—Pursuant to its clearinghouse role as a private, nonprofit organization and its mission to help find missing children, reduce online sexual exploitation of children and prevent future victimization, and except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), a civil claim or criminal charge against NCMEC, including any director, officer, employee, or agent of NCMEC, arising from the performance of the CyberTipline responsibilities or functions of NCMEC, as described in this section, section 2258A or 2258C of this title, or section 404 of the Missing Children’s Assistance Act (34 U.S.C. 11293), or from the efforts of NCMEC to identify child victims may not be brought in any Federal or State court.(b)Intentional, Reckless, or Other Misconduct.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to a claim or charge if NCMEC, or a director, officer, employee, or agent of NCMEC—(1) engaged in intentional misconduct; or(2) acted, or failed to act—(A) with actual malice;(B) with reckless disregard to a substantial risk of causing injury without legal justification; or(C) for a purpose unrelated to the performance of any responsibility or function under this section, section 2258A or 2258C of this title, or section 404 of the Missing Children’s Assistance Act (34 U.S.C. 11293).(c)Ordinary Business Activities.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to an act or omission relating to an ordinary business activity, including general administration or operations, the use of motor vehicles, or personnel management.(d)Minimizing Access.—NCMEC shall—(1) minimize the number of employees that are provided access to any visual depiction provided under section 2258A; and(2) ensure that any such visual depiction is permanently destroyed upon notification from a law enforcement agency.(Added Pub. L. 110–401, title V, § 501(a), Oct. 13, 2008, 122 Stat. 4250; amended Pub. L. 115–395, § 5, Dec. 21, 2018, 132 Stat. 5294.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–395, § 5(1), substituted “NCMEC” for “the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children” in section catchline.

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 115–395, § 5(2), substituted “Pursuant to its clearinghouse role as a private, nonprofit organization and its mission to help find missing children, reduce online sexual exploitation of children and prevent future victimization, and except as provided” for “Except as provided”, “against NCMEC” for “against the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children”, “(34 U.S.C. 11293)” for “(42 U.S.C. 5773)”, “of NCMEC” for “of such center” wherever appearing, and “from the efforts” for “from the effort”.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 115–395, § 5(3), substituted “if NCMEC” for “if the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children”, “of NCMEC” for “of such center”, and “(34 U.S.C. 11293)” for “(42 U.S.C. 5773)”.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 115–395, § 5(4), substituted “NCMEC” for “The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children” in introductory provisions and “visual depiction” for “image” in pars. (1) and (2).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 2014–2020 · leading case: Nabil Mikhail v. Jolie Kahn

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Nabil Mikhail v. Jolie Kahn (2014) ca3 · cites it 2× “Noting that Findlay likely was immune from suit under 18 U.S.C. § 2258D, 3 the District Court determined that, other than his insufficient conclusory allegations that Find-lay conspired with Kahn and her attorneys *73 in violation of his civil rights, Mikhail had not alleged any…”

Mikhail v. Kahn (2014) paed “It is enough to note that determining whether such immunity would apply would involve not only at least one issue of construction of a statute that has not yet been interpreted by any court, but also an issue of fact, namely, whether Mr. Findlay acted with a certain type of…”

United States v. Coyne (2018) vtd “In addition, 18 U.S.C. § 2258D allowed NCMEC to view and catalog child pornography as part of its effort to combat the exchange of these images.”

Jackson v. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (2020) lamd · cites it 4× “Defendant argues for the dismissal of this action, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), for the failure to state a claim under which relief can be granted.”

— 18 U.S.C. § 2258D(a) — 2 cases

Nabil Mikhail v. Jolie Kahn (2014) ca3 “Noting that Findlay likely was immune from suit under 18 U.S.C. § 2258D, 3 the District Court determined that, other than his insufficient conclusory allegations that Find-lay conspired with Kahn and her attorneys *73 in violation of his civil rights, Mikhail had not alleged any…”

Jackson v. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (2020) lamd “Defendant argues for the dismissal of this action, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), for the failure to state a claim under which relief can be granted.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.