Case 1:20-mc-00036-JEB-DAR Document 10 Filed 08/18/20 Page 2 of 29 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................3 ARGUMENT ...................................................................................................................................4 I. II. The SCA does not protect the privacy of the Myanmar government, its officials or its agents and it does not apply to the removed content The Gambia has requested. .........................................................................................................4 a. The Myanmar government, its officials, and its agents are not “users” because they do not qualify as “persons or entities” as those terms are defined in the SCA..........................................................................5 b. The Myanmar government, its officials, and its agents are not “users” because they are not “duly authorized” by Facebook to use its service to coordinate and conspire to commit genocide. ....................................9 c. The SCA does not apply because the content Facebook has removed from its platform is not a “communication while in electronic storage” as required by 18 U.S.C. § 2702(a)(1). ...................................11 Under the SCA the requested content is excepted from the statute’s prohibitions and can be permissibly disclosed...................................................................14 a. Facebook can permissibly disclose the requested information under section 18 U.S.C. § 2702(b)(5). .............................................................................14 b. Where, as here, a sovereign state and its agents have weaponized the Facebook platform to broadly communicate hate speech and incite genocide they have consented to the disclosure of their communications under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(b)(3). ....................................................16 III. Unlike the MLAT and CLOUD Act processes, a 28 U.S.C. § 1782 action is the proper mechanism for The Gambia to request information from Facebook. ...........................................................................................................................18 IV. The discovery The Gambia seeks is relevant and narrowly tailored. ................................19 CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................................................22 i