San Francisco Appeals Court Rules Meta, Google Can Be Sued Over Youth Social Media Addiction: 2400+ Cases To Move Forward

In a major legal setback for Big Tech, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is a premier American appellate court, has rejected a bid by Meta Platforms, Alphabet's Google, ByteDance's TikTok, and Snap Inc. to block massive litigation against them. The landmark ruling allows over 2,400 centralized lawsuits to move forward, which allege that these social media platforms were intentionally engineered with addictive features that triggered a severe youth mental health crisis.

The lawsuits have been brought by individuals, parents, school districts, municipalities and states, alleging that platforms including Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, YouTube and Snapchat were designed to encourage compulsive use among children and adolescents, contributing to mental health problems including depression, anxiety and body-image issues.

The central legal issue before the appeals court was the scope of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a federal law that generally protects online platforms from liability arising from content posted by third-party users.

Meta and TikTok had argued that the provision also protected them from claims alleging that they failed to warn users about the allegedly addictive nature of their platforms.

The 9th Circuit, however, did not decide the ultimate scope of Section 230 in these cases. Instead, it held that the companies could not seek appellate review at this stage because the lower court's orders were not final.

The appeals court noted that Section 230 operates as a defence to liability rather than conferring blanket immunity from being sued. Consequently, the companies' attempt to obtain an immediate appellate ruling on the defence was premature.

The litigation is being coordinated before US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California. The consolidated federal proceedings involve more than 3,000 cases, while hundreds of additional claims concerning similar allegations are pending in state courts. Approximately 3,300 related cases have also been consolidated in California state court.

The ruling comes amid a series of legal setbacks for social media companies over allegations concerning the impact of their platforms on young users.

In March, a Los Angeles jury found Meta and Google liable for negligence in a case brought by a young woman who alleged that she became addicted to Instagram and YouTube as a child. The jury awarded her $3 million in damages and recommended a further $3 million in punitive damages. Both companies have challenged the verdict.

In another development, a New Mexico court recently ordered Meta to pay $567 million into a fund aimed at addressing teen mental health issues after finding that the company had created a public nuisance through its conduct concerning young users. The ruling followed an earlier jury determination that Meta had misled consumers about the safety of its platforms, resulting in a $375 million penalty.

The 9th Circuit's latest ruling also rejected Meta's request to delay a separate trial brought by 29 state attorneys general. The states have accused Meta of illegally collecting and using children's data, designing its platforms to encourage prolonged use by young people and misleading consumers about the safety of its services.

That trial is scheduled to begin this week.

The latest ruling therefore does not determine whether Meta, TikTok, Google or Snap will ultimately be held liable for the alleged harms. It instead allows the underlying litigation to continue without an interlocutory appeal on the Section 230 issue.

The decision could have wider implications for the technology industry's long-running reliance on Section 230, particularly where plaintiffs frame their claims not around user-generated content but around the design, operation and alleged safety of the platforms themselves.

The companies have denied the allegations.