The Ninth Circuit appeared hesitant to halt more than 2,200 lawsuits claiming social media platforms were engineered to addict young users, questioning whether it is too early to decide immunity under Section 230. Meta, joined by Snap, Alphabet and ByteDance, urged the court to overturn lower-court orders that allowed the cases to proceed. Judges pressed both sides on whether Section 230 shields platform design features and whether an interlocutory appeal is appropriate at this stage. The consolidated cases in Oakland seek damages for alleged harms to children's mental health.
Appeals Court Appears Skeptical Of Meta's Bid To Dismiss Youth Addiction Lawsuits
The James R. Browning U.S. Court of Appeals Building, home of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, is pictured in San Francisco, California February 7, 2017. On Tuesday afternoon, the court plans to hear arguments regarding President Donald Trump's temporary travel ban on people from seven Muslim-majority countries. REUTERS/Noah Berger
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Tuesday signaled reluctance to block more than 2,200 lawsuits alleging major social media platforms were designed to be addictive for young users. Judges pressed the companies on whether it is premature to decide immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which the platforms say shields them from these claims.
What Happened
The consolidated cases—filed by states, municipalities, school districts and private individuals—allege that social media contributed to a surge in depression, anxiety and body-image problems among children and created a public-health crisis for American youth. The suits, centralized before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, seek damages, penalties and restitution.
Companies' Argument
Meta Platforms (owner of Facebook and Instagram), Snap Inc. (Snapchat), Alphabet Inc. (YouTube) and ByteDance (TikTok) asked the appeals court to undo lower-court rulings that required them to defend the litigation. The companies contend Section 230 protects them from liability arising out of third-party content posted on their platforms and therefore precludes the suits.
Judges' Reaction
Judges on the panel—Circuit Judges Jacqueline Nguyen and Mark Bennett, and U.S. District Judge Kiyo Matsumoto (sitting by designation)—pressed the defense on two fronts: whether the Ninth Circuit should intervene at this early, pretrial stage, and whether Section 230 provides the sweeping, blanket immunity the companies assert.
"It would be an enormous thing to require defendants to have to defend these types of suits," Meta attorney James Rouhandeh told the panel, arguing that the district court’s rulings were effectively final because they compelled defense of the litigation.
"Here our complaints are about features that they can remedy without looking at any third party content at all," Colorado Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson, representing the states, told the court.
Circuit Judge Nguyen observed that the text of Section 230 does not obviously support a sweeping immunity from suit. "When Congress wants to give immunity from suit, it knows how to say that," she told defense counsel.
Next Steps
The appeals court's comments do not constitute a final ruling. The companies are appealing orders issued by Judge Gonzalez Rogers in 2023 and 2024 that largely allowed the litigation to proceed. The case is captioned People of the State of California v. Meta Platforms Inc., No. 24-7032 (9th Cir.). Counsel of record include James Rouhandeh of Davis Polk for Meta; Jennifer Bennett of Gupta Wessler for individual plaintiffs, school districts and municipalities; and Colorado Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson for the state attorneys general.
Why it matters: The panel's skepticism highlights an emerging legal battleground over whether platform design and algorithmic features fall within Section 230’s protections, and whether courts should decide such immunity claims before the merits of the underlying public-health allegations are developed in discovery and trial.
Help us improve.
