A California federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by Salvadoran journalists whose devices were infected with the controversial Pegasus spyware, ruling that the case lacked jurisdiction in California. The plaintiffs, all affiliated with the independent news outlet El Faro, had argued that the attacks on their devices were linked to compromised infrastructure within the state.
The lawsuit, initiated in November 2022 by the Knight First Amendment Institute on behalf of lead plaintiff Carlos Dada and his colleagues, claimed that Pegasus was deployed against them at least 226 times between June 2020 and November 2021. This case marked the first instance of legal action against NSO Group, the manufacturer of Pegasus, in a U.S. court.
Jurisdictional Challenges
In the judge’s ruling, it was determined that the plaintiffs failed to establish sufficient grounds for the case to be heard in California. This decision follows a previous dismissal in March 2024, where another judge characterized the case as “entirely foreign” and lacking standing in the U.S. legal system. The plaintiffs contended that the spyware attacks were facilitated through infrastructure located in California, which they believed warranted jurisdiction.
Implications for Press Freedom
The dismissal represents a significant setback for the plaintiffs, who sought not only damages but also a court order requiring NSO Group to delete any data collected through the spyware and disclose the identity of the client responsible for the surveillance. The Knight Institute has indicated plans to appeal the ruling, emphasizing the broader implications for press freedom and the protection of journalists against state-sponsored surveillance.
The Pegasus spyware, developed by NSO Group, has been widely criticized for its use in targeting journalists, activists, and political dissidents globally. The case highlights ongoing concerns regarding the intersection of technology, privacy, and human rights, particularly in regions where press freedom is under threat.
As the legal battle continues, the outcome may set important precedents regarding the accountability of spyware manufacturers and the jurisdictional reach of U.S. courts in cases involving international surveillance.
For further details, refer to The Record.
