Thousands of lawsuits accusing major social media platforms of designing addictive products for young users can continue after a US appeals court rejected an attempt by Meta and TikTok to challenge an earlier ruling before the cases are resolved. The decision affects federal litigation involving more than 3,000 lawsuits against Meta Platforms, TikTok owner ByteDance, Google’s parent Alphabet and Snapchat operator Snap.
The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled Monday that Meta and TikTok had attempted to appeal too early. The companies wanted the appeals court to review whether Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protected them from claims concerning the allegedly addictive characteristics of their platforms.
Section 230 generally limits the circumstances in which online services can be held responsible for content created by their users. Meta and TikTok argued that those protections should also apply to allegations that they failed to adequately warn the public about potentially addictive aspects of their products. The appeals court concluded that Section 230 provides a defense against liability rather than immunity from having to face a lawsuit, meaning the companies must wait until the appropriate stage of the proceedings to pursue their appeal.
The lawsuits have been brought by individuals, school districts, municipalities and states. Plaintiffs accuse social media companies of intentionally developing features that encourage younger users to remain on their platforms and allege that those designs contributed to depression, anxiety, body-image problems and other harms. The companies have disputed allegations made against them in the litigation.
The cases have been consolidated before US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California. Her rulings in 2023 and 2024 largely allowed the claims to proceed, prompting Meta and TikTok to seek appellate review.
The appeals court also rejected Meta’s request to postpone a separate trial scheduled to begin Wednesday. That lawsuit was brought by 29 state attorneys general and includes allegations that Meta improperly collected and used children’s information, designed Facebook and Instagram to encourage continued use, and misrepresented the safety of its services.
Attorneys representing individuals and school districts said the decision clears the way for the states’ trial as well as another trial involving school districts currently scheduled for February. They argue that the proceedings will provide an opportunity to examine evidence about Meta’s knowledge of how its products affected children and the decisions the company made in response.
The federal cases are part of broader litigation confronting social media companies in the United States. Approximately 3,300 additional lawsuits involving similar allegations have been consolidated in California state court.
One California case reached a jury in March. A Los Angeles jury found Meta and Google negligent in a lawsuit brought by a young woman who said she became addicted to Instagram and YouTube as a child, awarding her $6 million. Meta and Google denied the claims and said they planned to appeal.
Meta has separately faced legal action in New Mexico. A judge recently ordered the company to pay $567 million into a teen mental health fund and implement measures affecting how its platforms operate for younger users after finding that Meta had created a public nuisance in the state. An earlier phase of that case resulted in a $375 million jury award after Meta was found to have violated consumer protection law.
The 9th Circuit’s latest ruling does not decide whether Meta, TikTok, Google or Snap are responsible for the harms alleged in the federal lawsuits. It instead leaves the cases before the lower court and prevents Meta and TikTok from using their Section 230 argument to obtain an immediate appellate review at this stage.