The US Supreme Court has declined to hear a case regarding whether Yelp is culpable for removing defamatory reviews from its site, resolving a case that could have affected web platforms’ legal protections. Today’s list of Supreme Court orders denies a complaint brought by Dawn Hassell, an attorney who requested that Yelp take down false, negative reviews about her practice. This means that a California Supreme Court decision will stand, and Yelp isn’t liable for the reviews.

Hassell v. Bird was filed in 2016 as a complaint against one of Hassell’s former clients, not Yelp. However, Yelp protested a court order to remove the reviews, arguing that it was protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. (Yelp has said it independently removes reviews it finds to be defamatory since they violate its terms of service.) Lower courts disagreed, but in mid-2018, the California Supreme Court ruled in Yelp’s favor. Then, the firm of Charles Harder — a member of President Donald Trump’s legal team who’s known for high-profile defamation lawsuits — petitioned the Supreme Court to hear a complaint against Yelp.

Section 230 is still at the center of other lawsuits

Section 230, which holds that web platforms generally aren’t liable for content posted by their users, is a major pillar of internet policy. But a handful of lawsuits are probing its limits. Dating app Grindr is currently facing accusations that it failed to stop a stalker from harassing his target through the app. And the Wisconsin Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case involving firearm classified advertising site Armslist, which was sued after a future mass shooter responded to an ad on the site.

The policy has also been under fire in Congress. In early 2018, the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA) made platforms liable for content that promoted sex work. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), who co-authored Section 230, has warned that further changes could be on the way unless web platforms take greater responsibility in moderating content “for the benefit of society.” (A handful of Republican lawmakers, meanwhile, have falsely claimed that Section 230 only protects politically “neutral” platforms.)

Yelp praised the California Supreme Court’s decision last year, calling it a win for “those of us who value sharing one another’s opinions and experiences” on the internet. It commended today’s decision as well. “We are happy to see the Supreme Court has ended Hassell’s efforts to sidestep the law to compel Yelp to remove online reviews. This takes away a tool that could have been easily abused by litigants to obtain easy removal of entirely truthful consumer opinions,” a spokesperson told The Verge.

Harder, meanwhile, has previously called Yelp’s argument an “outrageous” misreading of the law. The firm did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Update 3:00PM ET: Added statement from Yelp.