Additional Coverage:
- Meta, other companies must face thousands of lawsuits over child social media addiction, appeals court rules (foxbusiness.com)
A federal appeals court has allowed thousands of lawsuits against major social media companies Meta, Google, TikTok, and Snapchat to proceed, rejecting their attempts to have the cases dismissed. The lawsuits claim these platforms were deliberately designed to be addictive to young users.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Meta and TikTok’s appeal, which sought to overturn a lower court’s decision requiring the companies to face over 3,000 lawsuits filed in federal court. The court ruled that the companies’ appeal was premature.
At the heart of the companies’ defense was Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, a law that generally shields online platforms from liability for content posted by their users. Meta and TikTok argued that Section 230 also protects them from lawsuits claiming they failed to warn the public about the addictive nature of their platforms.
However, the court clarified that Section 230 provides a defense to liability but does not grant immunity from being sued. “The statute merely provides a defense to liability – not immunity from suit,” Judge Jacqueline Nguyen wrote in the ruling.
This decision opens the door for lawsuits alleging that social media companies intentionally designed their platforms to promote addictive behavior, failed to verify users’ ages properly, and did not take sufficient measures to block harmful content.
Additionally, the court denied Meta’s request to delay an upcoming trial brought by 29 state attorneys general. The lawsuit accuses Meta of illegally collecting and using children’s data, engineering its platforms to addict young users, and misleading consumers about child safety protections. Meta had argued that the trial should be postponed until the appeal was resolved.
Legal representatives for the plaintiffs, which include thousands of school districts and individuals, welcomed the ruling, noting that it allows not only the state attorneys’ trial to proceed but also a separate trial involving claims from school districts scheduled for February.
“A trial is how the public finds out what Meta knew about its products’ impact on children, when it knew it, and what it chose to do with that knowledge,” the attorneys said. “Meta has fought to keep that evidence from the public.”
This ruling follows a recent New Mexico court decision that found Meta had created a public nuisance in the state, ordering the company to pay $567 million into a teen mental health fund and implement new youth safety measures. Earlier this year, juries in California and New Mexico also ruled against Meta and Google’s YouTube on related child safety issues.
The appeals court’s decision marks a significant development in ongoing legal battles over the responsibilities of social media platforms in protecting young users from harm.