OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA / RankWire.AI / – A federal appeals court in the United States has permitted more than 3,000 lawsuits related to social media addiction to move forward. On Aug. 10, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed appeals from Meta Platforms and TikTok, which challenged the ongoing litigation process initiated by lower courts. The appellate court determined that the companies attempted to seek review prematurely and that the lower court orders, which kept the cases active, should remain in effect. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers is overseeing these consolidated federal cases in Oakland.
The core of the dispute partly involves Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, with Meta and TikTok claiming that the law shields them from claims related to warnings about platforms allegedly designed to be addictive. The appeals court clarified that Section 230 offers a defense against liability, not complete immunity from being sued, which meant an immediate appeal at this stage was not appropriate. The court’s decision upheld earlier orders from the federal trial court without passing judgment on whether the companies are ultimately liable.
The plaintiffs range from individuals and families to school districts, local governments, and state authorities. 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 related harms. The defendants deny these allegations. The plaintiffs are seeking damages, penalties, and restitution through the federal court process. Additionally, approximately 3,300 more similar cases have been consolidated in California state court.
Meta Faces a Separate Trial in Oakland as Proceedings Continue
In addition to the consolidated federal lawsuits, the appeals court also rejected Meta’s request to delay a separate case brought by 29 state attorneys general. Jury selection for this case is scheduled to commence on Aug. 12 in Oakland, with opening statements set for Aug. 18. The states allege that Meta unlawfully collected and exploited children’s data, and they accuse Facebook and Instagram of incorporating features that foster addictive behavior while also misleading consumers regarding the safety of their platforms. Meta has denied these allegations in the multistate litigation.
The case includes claims under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act and various state consumer protection statutes. States such as California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey also have their own claims scheduled for the trial. A federal judge previously dismissed Meta’s attempt to dismiss the case before it reached trial, citing factual disputes requiring further examination. Four states have submitted calculations seeking significant penalties if they succeed, while Meta contests both the calculations and their legal grounds.
Previous Court Decisions Add to the Wave of Social Media Litigation
These federal cases are part of a broader pattern of judicial actions addressing youth safety and the design of social media platforms. On Aug. 6, a judge in New Mexico ordered Meta to pay $567 million toward a youth mental health fund and related initiatives, alongside imposing safety measures on Facebook and Instagram for a five-year period. This ruling followed a $375 million civil penalty handed down by a New Mexico jury in March, resulting in a combined financial exposure of $942 million for Meta in this matter. Additionally, in March, a Los Angeles jury found Meta and Google negligent in a separate social media case, awarding $6 million to a young woman who claimed to have become addicted to platforms as a child and suffered mental health consequences. TikTok and Snap reached settlement agreements with the plaintiff before trial, terms of which remain undisclosed. Both Meta and Google have announced their intentions to appeal the California verdict.