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 say platform features encouraged compulsive use among children and teenagers. They also link that use to several mental health harms.
The appeal centered on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Meta and TikTok argued that the law offered them protection from claims related to platform content and warnings. The appeals court clarified that Section 230 functions as a defense against liability, not immunity from lawsuits. This ruling prevents the companies from seeking appellate review at this stage. The court did not determine whether Section 230 could later dismiss individual claims. Consequently, existing trial court orders stay in effect.
The series of federal cases includes allegations from individuals, families, school districts, cities, and state governments. Google and Snap have also been named in the broader legal proceedings. The plaintiffs accuse these companies of designing social media platforms that foster repeated engagement among young users. The complaints cite issues such as depression, anxiety, body image concerns, and other purported harms. Both companies contest these allegations. Additionally, approximately 3,300 related cases with similar claims are consolidated in California state court.
Meta’s Multi-State Case Progresses Toward Jury Selection
Meta is separately involved in a federal lawsuit filed by 29 state attorneys general. Jury selection is scheduled to begin on Aug. 12 in Oakland, with the trial expected to commence on Aug. 17. The states accuse Meta of unlawfully collecting and exploiting children’s personal data. They also claim that Facebook and Instagram incorporated features designed to promote compulsive usage. The case further alleges that Meta misled consumers about the safety of its platforms and the protections for younger users. Meta denies these claims.
Claims under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, along with various state consumer protection laws, are part of this case. States such as California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey have also filed state law claims. A federal judge previously refused to dismiss the case before trial, citing factual disputes requiring further examination. Several states have submitted calculations aiming for financial penalties if they succeed. Meta disputes both the legal basis and the figures used in these calculations.
Recent Court Decisions Intensify Youth Safety Legal Challenges
Several recent rulings have heightened the legal pressure on social media companies regarding youth safety and platform design. On Aug. 6, a judge in New Mexico ordered Meta to allocate $567 million for a youth mental health fund and related initiatives. The ruling also mandates safety measures on Facebook and Instagram for five years. In March, a New Mexico jury imposed a $375 million civil penalty on Meta. Together, these decisions amount to a potential financial exposure of $942 million for Meta in that state case.
In a separate case, a Los Angeles jury found Meta and Google negligent in a lawsuit concerning social media addiction. The jury awarded $6 million to a young woman who claimed addiction and mental health issues resulting from childhood use of platforms like YouTube and Instagram. TikTok and Snap settled with the plaintiff before trial under undisclosed terms. Both Meta and Google have announced plans to appeal the verdict in California.