A federal appeals court in the United States ruled on Monday that thousands of lawsuits against Meta Platforms, Google owner Alphabet, TikTok owner ByteDance and other social media companies can move forward, over claims that the firms designed their products to make young users addicted.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco, rejected an attempt by the companies to overturn a lower court ruling that requires them to answer more than 3,000 lawsuits filed in federal court. The panel found that the companies had filed their appeal too early, before the litigation had progressed far enough through the courts.
The defendants, who also include Snapchat owner Snap Inc., had argued that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which generally shields online platforms from claims tied to content posted by users, should also block lawsuits accusing them of failing to warn the public about the addictive potential of their platforms.
Most appeals are filed only after a case has been resolved through a ruling or verdict. Meta argued that Section 230 gave it broad immunity, meaning it could appeal the lower court's decision immediately. The 9th Circuit disagreed, saying Section 230 provides a defense against liability rather than immunity from being sued, making the appeal premature.
The court also turned down Meta's request to delay a trial due to begin Wednesday in a case brought by 29 state attorneys general, who accuse the company of illegally collecting and using children's data, designing its platforms to keep young users constantly engaged, and misleading consumers about the safety of its services. Meta had argued the trial should not proceed while its appeal was pending.
Representatives for Meta and for the lawyers leading the appeal did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Thousands of Lawsuits Over Youth Mental Health
The suits, filed by states, municipalities, school districts and individuals, allege that the social media companies intentionally made young users dependent on their platforms, contributing to rising rates of depression, anxiety and body image problems, as well as a broader mental health crisis among young people in the United States in recent years.
Parents, school districts, states and other plaintiffs argued that the lower court's ruling was not final and therefore could not be appealed. They also disputed the companies' reading of Section 230, arguing the protection does not cover claims about how the platforms operate and are designed.
The cases are centralized before District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, and seek damages, fines and restitution. The companies had appealed rulings issued by Rogers in 2023 and 2024 that largely allowed the lawsuits to proceed.
The companies also face hundreds of similar lawsuits in state courts, including roughly 3,300 cases consolidated into a coordinated proceeding in California's court system.
Verdicts Already Against Meta and Google
In the first case from the California coordinated proceeding to reach trial, seen as an important test of how juries might respond to similar claims, a Los Angeles jury concluded in March that Meta and Google had acted negligently in designing social media platforms that harm young people.
The jury awarded $6 million to a woman, now 20, who said she developed an addiction to Instagram and YouTube as a child.
Meta has also lost both phases of a case brought by the state of New Mexico, described as a landmark lawsuit. In March, a jury ordered the company to pay $375 million after finding it had misled consumers about the safety of its platforms.
On Thursday, a judge found that Meta had created a public nuisance, ordering the company to pay an additional $567 million and to adopt protective measures for young users.
Both Meta and Google deny the allegations in these cases and have said they will appeal.
