A federal appeals court ruled Monday that more than 3,000 lawsuits accusing Meta, TikTok, Google, Snap and other tech companies of deliberately designing addictive platforms for young users can proceed.
Time reports that the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the thousands of lawsuits, filed by states, municipalities, school districts and individuals, can move forward in district court. The plaintiffs allege that addictive algorithms and insufficient safeguards against harmful content have contributed to rising rates of depression, anxiety and body image issues among young people.
The cases had been consolidated before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, who ruled in 2023 and 2024 that most of the litigation could proceed. Meta and TikTok appealed those orders, arguing they were shielded from liability under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996, a federal law that generally protects companies from being sued over content posted by users.
In a 24-page opinion, Judge Jacqueline Nguyen wrote that Section 230 provides a “defense to liability,” not blanket immunity from lawsuits. During oral arguments in January, Nguyen had signaled skepticism toward the companies’ position, saying, “When Congress wants to give immunity from suit, it knows how to say that.” Plaintiffs have argued that the law does not shield claims focused on how companies intentionally designed and operated their products.
The appeals court did not decide whether Section 230 bars those product-design claims, ruling instead that the appeal was premature because the trial court’s decision was not final. That question, which could shape other litigation against tech companies, remains unresolved. The lawsuits will continue in district court, where plaintiffs are seeking damages, civil penalties and restitution.
Separately, roughly 3,300 similar cases are being coordinated in California state court. In the first bellwether trial in March, a Los Angeles jury awarded $6 million to a 20-year-old woman who said she developed depression, anxiety and body dysmorphia after becoming addicted to Instagram and YouTube as a child. The jury found Meta and Google negligent in designing their platforms and failing to warn of the risks. TikTok and Snap had settled with the plaintiff before trial. All companies have denied the allegations and filed appeals.
Also in March, a New Mexico jury found that Meta had willfully misled users about platform safety and enabled child sexual exploitation, ordering the company to pay $375 million in civil penalties. State District Judge Bryan Biedscheid later ordered Meta to pay an additional $567 million and to implement safeguards including stricter age verification and usage limits. Meta has denied wrongdoing and plans to appeal.
A separate trial brought by 29 states against Meta is scheduled to begin Wednesday. The appeals court on Monday rejected Meta’s request to delay that trial, which centers on allegations that the company violated federal privacy law and state consumer protection statutes by collecting children’s data, using potentially addictive design features and making misleading safety claims. Meta denies the allegations.
The lawsuits arrive as governments worldwide impose new restrictions on social media use by minors. In December, Australia became the first country to enact a nationwide ban on social media access for children under 16. Spain has proposed a similar ban pending parliamentary approval, while the United Kingdom plans to restrict access to certain platforms for under-16s starting early next year. France’s Parliament approved a ban for children under 15 last month, though it faces constitutional review. Denmark, Greece and Norway have discussed comparable measures.
Within the U.S., at least 20 states have enacted laws addressing minors’ social media use, though many face legal challenges. Illinois passed a law in July restricting how platforms use minors’ data to curate feeds, set to take effect in 2028. NetChoice, a trade group representing Meta, TikTok and other companies, has challenged several state laws on free speech and privacy grounds, and courts in states including Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Nebraska and Virginia have blocked all or parts of such measures. Reddit has also filed a legal challenge against Australia’s ban.
Read more at Time here.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of AI, free speech, and online censorship.
Read the full article here