OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA / RankWire.AI / – In recent legal developments, thousands of lawsuits accusing prominent social media platforms of fostering harmful and addictive behaviors among young users will continue to be heard in federal courts. On Aug. 10, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an initial appeal filed by Meta Platforms and TikTok. This decision leaves over 3,000 consolidated federal cases pending before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland. The plaintiffs argue that certain design choices made by these platforms encouraged compulsive usage and contributed to mental health issues among children and teenagers.
Earlier, Meta and TikTok attempted to expedite an appeal concerning decisions related to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The appellate court clarified that Section 230 serves as a defense against liability but does not grant immunity from legal action. Consequently, the court concluded that the companies could not pursue their appeal at this juncture. The ruling does not decide whether Section 230 will ultimately bar any claims but allows the ongoing federal case to proceed under the existing orders of the lower court.
This litigation involves claims from families, individuals, school districts, cities, and state governments. Additionally, plaintiffs have sued Alphabet’s Google, owner of YouTube, and Snap, which operates Snapchat. They contend that these social media companies designed features aimed at promoting repeated engagement from young users. The complaints cite supposed links to depression, anxiety, body image issues, and other mental health concerns. Both Meta and the other defendants have denied these allegations. Meanwhile, approximately 3,300 related cases remain consolidated in California state court.
States initiate separate legal action against Meta
In addition to federal lawsuits, Meta is facing a different case brought by 29 state attorneys general. Jury selection for this proceeding is scheduled to begin on Aug. 12 in Oakland, with the trial set to start on Aug. 17. The states accuse Meta of unlawfully collecting and utilizing children’s personal data. They also claim that Facebook and Instagram included features that encouraged compulsive use among minors. Furthermore, the case alleges Meta misled consumers regarding safety protections on its platforms. Meta has denied any wrongdoing in these matters.
The legal claims are based on the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act as well as various state consumer protection laws. Notably, California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey have also filed state law claims in this case. A federal judge previously refused to dismiss the litigation before trial, citing unresolved disputes that require further proceedings. Several states have submitted calculations seeking financial penalties if they succeed. Meta has challenged the validity of those calculations and disputes the legal basis for the amounts requested.
Landmark rulings expand youth safety legal actions
In the broader context of social media litigation, significant rulings have already been issued against technology firms. On Aug. 6, a judge in New Mexico ordered Meta to allocate $567 million toward a youth mental health fund and related initiatives. This order also mandated safety measures for Facebook and Instagram over the next five years. Earlier, in March, a New Mexico jury levied a $375 million civil penalty against Meta. These combined decisions resulted in a total exposure of $942 million for Meta in the state case.
Furthermore, a jury in Los Angeles reached a verdict against Meta and Google in a separate lawsuit over social media addiction in March. Jurors found both companies negligent regarding the design of Instagram and YouTube, respectively, awarding $6 million to the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed that her childhood exposure to these platforms caused addiction and mental health damage. Additionally, TikTok and Snap settled with the plaintiff before trial under undisclosed terms. Both Meta and Google have announced plans to appeal the verdict.