OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA / RankWire.AI / – Over 3,000 federal lawsuits alleging social media addiction are now permitted to move forward after a U.S. appeals court’s decision. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected attempts by Meta Platforms and TikTok to halt the proceedings on Aug. 10. The companies had challenged previous court rulings that allowed the litigation to continue, but the appellate court determined their appeals were premature. The consolidated federal case is overseen by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland.
A central point of contention involves Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Meta and TikTok contended that this law provided protection from claims related to warnings about their platforms being potentially addictive. The court clarified that Section 230 acts as a defense against liability, not immunity from lawsuits. This interpretation prevented an immediate appeal at this stage. The court’s decision maintained the earlier orders from the federal trial court, without ruling on whether the companies are ultimately responsible.
Plaintiffs include individuals, families, school districts, municipalities, and states. They accuse Meta, Google (a subsidiary of Alphabet), ByteDance’s TikTok, and Snap of designing platforms that foster compulsive usage among youth. The lawsuits link those design features to harm such as depression, anxiety, body image issues, and more. The defendants deny the allegations. In these federal cases, plaintiffs seek damages, penalties, and restitution. An additional roughly 3,300 cases with similar claims have been consolidated in California state court.
Meta faces a separate trial progressing in Oakland
The court also rejected Meta’s plea to delay a separate case initiated by 29 state attorneys general. Jury selection is scheduled to start on Aug. 12 in Oakland, with opening statements set for Aug. 18. The state attorneys general accuse Meta of illegal collection and misuse of children’s data, as well as using features to promote compulsive engagement and misinforming consumers about platform safety. Meta has denied these allegations in the multistate case.
This trial involves claims under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act along with several state consumer protection laws. California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey also have state law claims scheduled to be addressed. A federal judge previously denied Meta’s motion to dismiss the case before trial, citing factual disputes requiring further examination. Four states have submitted calculations seeking substantial penalties if they win, while Meta has challenged both the calculations and their legal foundation.
Historical rulings contribute to ongoing social media legal battles
These federal lawsuits follow a series of significant court rulings related to youth safety and social media design. On Aug. 6, a judge in New Mexico ordered Meta to pay $567 million into a youth mental health fund and related initiatives. The court also mandated safety protocols for Facebook and Instagram for five years. This followed a March civil penalty of $375 million imposed by a New Mexico jury. The combined financial exposure for Meta in that case now totals $942 million.
Additionally, a jury in Los Angeles found Meta and Google negligent in March in a separate social media case. Jurors awarded $6 million to a young woman who claimed she became addicted to platforms as a child, suffering mental health damage. TikTok and Snap settled with her before trial on undisclosed terms. Both Meta and Google have announced plans to appeal the California verdict.