OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA / RankWire.AI / – More than 3,000 federal lawsuits accusing major technology companies of promoting addictive social media use can continue in court. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an early appeal from Meta Platforms and TikTok on Aug. 10. The decision keeps the consolidated cases before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland. Plaintiffs argue that certain platform features fostered compulsive engagement among children and teenagers, and they connect this usage to various mental health issues.
The appellate review centered on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Meta and TikTok contended that this law offered protection from claims related to content on their platforms and their warnings. However, the appeals court clarified that Section 230 functions as a defense against liability rather than granting immunity from lawsuits. As a result, the companies could not pursue further appellate review at this point, and the court did not resolve whether Section 230 might later serve to dismiss individual claims. Consequently, the existing trial court orders remain valid and enforceable.
These federal actions involve allegations from individuals, families, school districts, cities, and state governments. The broader litigation also includes Google and Snap as defendants, with accusations that these companies designed social media products that encouraged repeated use by young users, leading to claims of depression, anxiety, body image concerns, and other damages. The companies deny these allegations. Additionally, approximately 3,300 related cases with similar claims are consolidated in California state court.
Meta’s Multistate Litigation Advances Toward Jury Selection
Meta is also involved in a separate federal lawsuit filed by 29 state attorneys general, with jury selection scheduled for Aug. 12 in Oakland and the trial set to commence on Aug. 17. The states allege that Meta unlawfully collected and used children’s personal information, and they accuse Facebook and Instagram of incorporating features that promoted compulsive use, in addition to claiming that Meta misled consumers about platform safety measures and protections for younger users. Meta denies these allegations.
This case encompasses claims under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act along with multiple state consumer protection statutes. States including California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey have also brought state law claims. A federal judge previously refused to dismiss the case before trial, citing factual disputes that require further proceedings. Several states have submitted calculations seeking financial penalties if they succeed, though Meta disputes both these figures and the legal basis for the requested sanctions.
Recent Judicial Decisions Add to Pressure on Youth Safety Litigation
Previous rulings have already resulted in substantial financial judgments related to social media design and child protection issues. On Aug. 6, a New Mexico judge ordered Meta to allocate $567 million toward a youth mental health fund and associated programs, while also mandating safety improvements on Facebook and Instagram over a five-year period. Earlier, in March, a New Mexico jury imposed a $375 million civil penalty, collectively creating a potential liability of $942 million for Meta in that state case. Additionally, a Los Angeles jury ruled against Meta and Google in March in a separate lawsuit concerning social media addiction, finding both companies negligent in designing Instagram and YouTube, and awarding $6 million to a young woman who claimed addiction and mental health issues stemming from childhood platform use. Prior to trial, TikTok and Snap settled with the plaintiff under terms that remain undisclosed. Meta and Google have indicated plans to appeal the California verdict.