OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA / RankWire.AI / – More than 3,000 federal lawsuits claiming social media addiction are now allowed to proceed after a U.S. appeals court decision. On Aug. 10, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed appeals from Meta Platforms and TikTok, which contested the orders of the lower court that kept the litigation active. The court determined their appeal was premature, stating they sought review too early. Federal proceedings are overseen by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, where the consolidated cases are being handled.
A significant aspect of the dispute involves Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Meta and TikTok argued this law protects them from claims related to warnings about the addictive nature of their platforms. The appeals court clarified that Section 230 offers a defense against liability, not complete immunity from legal action. This interpretation prevented an immediate appeal at this stage. Consequently, the court upheld earlier orders from the federal trial court without making a judgment on whether the companies are ultimately liable.
The plaintiffs include individuals, families, school districts, municipalities, and states. They allege that Meta, Alphabet’s Google, ByteDance’s TikTok, and Snap designed features encouraging compulsive usage among young users. The lawsuits connect these alleged design choices to issues such as depression, anxiety, body image concerns, and other harms. The defendants have denied these claims. Plaintiffs are seeking damages, penalties, and restitution through the federal proceedings, while about 3,300 additional cases with similar allegations have been consolidated in California state court.
Meta’s separate case advances in Oakland
The appeals court also denied Meta’s request to delay a different case brought by 29 state attorneys general. Jury selection for this case is set to begin on Aug. 12 in Oakland, with opening statements scheduled for Aug. 18. The states accuse Meta of unlawfully collecting and using children’s data. They also contend that Facebook and Instagram employed features that fostered compulsive behavior and that Meta misled consumers about platform safety. Meta has denied the allegations in this multistate case.
Claims under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act and various state consumer protection laws are part of the trial. Additionally, California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey have filed state law claims that will be addressed during the proceedings. A federal judge previously rejected Meta’s effort to dismiss the case before trial, citing factual disagreements needing further review. Four states have presented calculations seeking substantial penalties if they succeed, while Meta has challenged both these figures and the legal grounds supporting them.
Previous judicial rulings contributing to social media litigation
These federal cases follow a series of notable court decisions related to youth safety and social media platform design. On Aug. 6, a judge in New Mexico ordered Meta to allocate $567 million toward a youth mental health fund and related initiatives, along with implementing safety measures for Facebook and Instagram over five years. This ruling followed a $375 million civil penalty handed down by a New Mexico jury in March. In total, these decisions exposed Meta to a financial liability of $942 million in that case.
In another development, a Los Angeles jury found against Meta and Google in March, in a separate social media lawsuit. Jurors concluded both companies were negligent in designing Instagram and YouTube, awarding $6 million to a young woman who claimed to have become addicted to these platforms as a child and experienced mental health issues as a result. Before trial, TikTok and Snap settled with the plaintiff on undisclosed terms. Meta and Google have announced their intention to appeal the California verdict.