OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA / RankWire.AI / – A U.S. appeals court has permitted more than 3,000 federal lawsuits concerning alleged social media addiction to move forward. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed appeals from Meta Platforms and TikTok on Aug. 10. These companies challenged the lower court rulings that kept the legal processes active. The appeals court noted their appeals were filed prematurely. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers is overseeing the consolidated federal cases in Oakland.
The controversy partly revolves around Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Meta and TikTok contended that this law protected them from claims related to warnings about their platforms’ potential addictiveness. The court clarified that Section 230 offers a defense against liability but does not grant immunity from being sued. This distinction prevented an immediate appeal at this point. The ruling upheld earlier decisions from the federal trial court without ruling on whether the companies are ultimately liable.
The plaintiffs comprise individuals, families, school districts, municipalities, and states. They accuse Meta, Alphabet’s Google, ByteDance’s TikTok, and Snap of designing features that promote compulsive usage among young users. These lawsuits link those alleged design choices to issues such as depression, anxiety, body image concerns, and other damages. The defendants have denied these claims. The plaintiffs are seeking damages, penalties, and restitution in the federal cases. An additional approximately 3,300 similar cases are combined in California state court.
Separate Meta lawsuit advances in Oakland
The appeals court also rejected Meta’s request to delay a separate case initiated by 29 state attorneys general. Jury selection is set to start on Aug. 12 in Oakland, with opening statements scheduled for Aug. 18. The states accuse Meta of unlawfully collecting and utilizing children’s data. They further allege that Facebook and Instagram employed features that foster compulsive use and that Meta misled consumers regarding the safety of their platforms. Meta has denied these allegations in the multistate case.
This trial involves claims under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act along with various state consumer protection statutes. California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey also have state law claims scheduled for the proceedings. A federal judge previously rejected Meta’s attempt to dismiss the case before trial, citing factual disputes requiring further examination. Four states have submitted calculations for substantial penalties if they win, while Meta has challenged both the calculations and their legal foundations.
Historical rulings contribute to social media legal actions
These federal lawsuits follow several notable court rulings regarding youth safety and social media 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. Additionally, safety measures for Facebook and Instagram were mandated for five years. This ruling came after a New Mexico jury imposed a $375 million civil penalty in March. The combined financial exposure for Meta in this case totals $942 million.
In another case, a Los Angeles jury found against Meta and Google in March concerning social media design. Jurors determined both companies were negligent in designing Instagram and YouTube and awarded $6 million to a young woman. She claimed to have become addicted to these platforms as a child, which caused mental health issues. TikTok and Snap settled with the plaintiff before trial on undisclosed terms. Meta and Google announced intentions to appeal the California verdict.