Meta And TikTok Lose Appeal As 3,000+ Social Media Addiction Lawsuits Move Forward

Meta and TikTok have lost an attempt to immediately challenge rulings allowing more than 3,000 federal lawsuits over alleged social media addiction to proceed, keeping a major wave of litigation against some of the world’s largest technology companies alive.

 

TL;DR

 

• A US appeals court dismissed Meta and TikTok’s appeals as premature.
• More than 3,000 federal lawsuits target Meta, TikTok, Google and Snap over allegedly addictive platform designs.
• The court did not decide whether the companies are liable for the alleged harms.
• Meta also failed to delay a separate trial involving 29 state attorneys general.

 

The San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an appeal from Meta and TikTok that sought to overturn lower-court rulings allowing the cases to continue.

According to the Ninth Circuit opinion filed on August 10, the companies brought their appeals too early. Reuters reported that the court determined Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provides a potential defense against liability, rather than immunity from having to face the lawsuits in the first place.

That distinction means the companies may still raise Section 230 defenses as the litigation proceeds, but they cannot currently use the provision to halt the entire group of cases through an immediate appeal.

 

What Do The 3,000+ Social Media Addiction Lawsuits Allege?

 

The cases form part of In re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3047, which is centralized before US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California.

The official court page identifies Meta Platforms, Instagram, Snap, TikTok, ByteDance, YouTube, Google and Alphabet among the defendants. Plaintiffs allege their social media platforms were designed to maximize screen time and encourage addictive behavior among adolescents, resulting in emotional and physical harms.

The federal litigation now encompasses more than 3,000 lawsuits filed by individuals, school districts, states, municipalities and other plaintiffs. The complaints allege that social media companies intentionally created or used product features that kept young users engaged and contributed to problems such as depression, anxiety and body-image issues.

These remain allegations, and the latest appeals-court decision does not establish that Meta, TikTok, Google, Snap or the other defendants caused social media addiction or are legally liable for the claimed harms.

 

Why Did Meta And TikTok Invoke Section 230?

 

Meta and TikTok argued that Section 230, a US law that generally protects online services from liability arising from content posted by users, should also block claims alleging that the companies failed to warn people about the purportedly addictive nature of their platforms.

However, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the companies could not immediately appeal the lower court’s rejection of that argument. Most appeals occur following a final judgment rather than while litigation is still underway.

The decision therefore keeps the litigation moving without resolving the broader question of whether Section 230 ultimately protects the platforms against specific claims.

Meta Also Fails To Delay A 29-State Trial

 

The appeals court also rejected Meta’s attempt to delay a separate federal trial involving 29 state attorneys general.

That case alleges Meta designed Facebook and Instagram to keep young users engaged, misled consumers about platform safety and illegally collected or used children’s data. Jury selection began on August 12, while opening statements are scheduled for August 18.

California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey are leading the trial, with the states seeking platform changes including age restrictions and limits on features such as infinite scroll.

Meta disputes the allegations.

In a first-party statement addressing litigation over teen safety, the company said, “We’re proud of our record. We will defend ourselves in court against claims that misrepresent the facts and ignore the work we’ve done.”

Meta has also highlighted protections including Teen Accounts, privacy defaults and parental time controls, arguing that it has made product decisions intended to reduce risks for younger users.