Attorney Barry Glazer strikes back at tech giants Meta and Google for facilitating illegal squatter networks that are systematically invading vacant properties across America.
Key Takeaways
- Baltimore attorney Barry Glazer has filed a class-action lawsuit against Meta and Google for allowing “squatter house networks” to operate on their platforms
- These illegal networks sell unauthorized access to vacant properties, including keys and tours, marketing them as “squatter houses”
- Property owners face increased liability, maintenance costs, and extended vacancies due to these illegal occupations
- The lawsuit alleges that tech platforms are failing to enforce their own anti-fraud policies, effectively enabling property theft
- This represents another front in the battle against big tech negligence, as Glazer is also pursuing action related to counterfeit coin distribution
Baltimore Attorney Takes On Tech Giants Over Squatter Networks
Baltimore lawyer Barry Glazer has filed a proposed class-action lawsuit in U.S. District Court for Maryland against Meta and Google, accusing the tech giants of enabling illegal “squatter” networks on their platforms. The lawsuit alleges that Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube are hosting communities that sell unauthorized access to vacant properties, significantly harming legitimate property owners. These organized networks brazenly advertise keys and tours to illegally accessed properties, sometimes explicitly marketing them as “squatter houses” – a direct challenge to property rights that tech companies have failed to address.
The scale of this problem appears to be extensive, with Glazer and co-plaintiff Gina Gargeu claiming these unauthorized networks are operating in plain sight across multiple social media platforms. The legal action represents a growing push against big tech’s failure to police criminal activity occurring through their services. For conservative property owners who value strong property rights, this case highlights how tech companies’ negligence directly undermines fundamental American values of ownership and lawful commerce, According to The Court Documentation.
Financial Impact On Property Owners And Communities
The financial consequences for property owners dealing with these illegal squatter situations are substantial. According to the lawsuit, when squatters illegally occupy properties, real estate companies face increased liability and maintenance costs. The formal eviction process required to remove these individuals is expensive and time-consuming, extending the period properties remain vacant and depriving companies of potential sales income. This problem has become so widespread that it’s creating a significant burden on legitimate real estate businesses throughout the country.
“I can’t believe they’re getting away with it… blatantly… It’s going on everywhere,” Said Barry Glazer, the attorney leading the lawsuit against Meta and Google.
The impact extends beyond individual property owners to entire communities. When properties are illegally occupied, neighborhood safety and property values can decline. The situation creates an unfair advantage for criminals who exploit the slow legal system while legitimate businesses must follow proper channels. President Trump has consistently advocated for strong property rights and law enforcement, positions that align with addressing this growing problem of tech-facilitated property invasions.
Tech Platform Accountability At Stake
At the heart of Glazer’s lawsuit is the claim that Meta and Google are failing to enforce their own anti-fraud policies, effectively enabling criminal activity. The case represents a growing conservative push to hold tech companies accountable for the content they host and the real-world consequences of their platform policies. This lawsuit suggests that by allowing these squatter networks to operate openly, tech companies are complicit in undermining legitimate property rights – a cornerstone of American economic freedom.
The class-action approach indicates that Glazer believes this problem affects many property owners across the country. If successful, the lawsuit could force major changes in how tech platforms monitor and remove content that facilitates illegal property occupation. For Americans concerned about the protection of private property rights, this case represents an important stand against big tech enabling criminal activity while hiding behind Section 230 protections that shield platforms from liability for user content.
