Judge thins more claims in sprawling California lawsuit over social media addiction

OAKLAND, Calif. (CN) — A federal judge on Friday issued a fifth and supposedly final ruling on a series of dismissal requests in a sprawling lawsuit against social media companies over the addictive nature of their apps when it comes to kids.

Overall, the 29-page decision by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzales Rogers was a mixed bag for state plaintiffs and social-media company defendants alike. Although tech companies Meta and Snap Inc. succeeded in dismissing claims that they violated two criminal child sex abuse material laws, claims of wrongful death and general negligence persist against all defendant companies.

Some of the decisions to dismiss were relatively straightforward. The judge cited Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 as the basis for dismissing claims that Meta and Snap failed to remove, report or take action against child sex abuse material on their platforms.

“Most courts have held Section 230 bars civil CSAM claims against social media platforms,” the Barack Obama appointee stated.

Other matters weren’t as clear. Concerning negligence claims, the court had to sort out whether there were plausible claims the social media companies created an unreasonable risk of harm by designing their platforms to foster addiction and compulsive use by young users.

Alternatively and failing that possibility, was it plausible the companies neglected to implement reasonable measures to reduce the risk of addiction?

The social media giants in the case moved to dismiss negligence claims while ignoring key features of their apps, the plaintiffs argue. But the companies say the negligence claims take a “shotgun” approach that does not adequately explain which features are problematic.

In the end, the judge sided with the state plaintiffs. Still, she said portions of the claims were restricted by Section 230.

Other parts of the decision were even piecemeal and complicated. Loss of consortium claims — that is, claims filed by loved ones of the injured for the loss or impairment of the intangible benefits of a relationship — were dismissed in 24 states, including California, as well as the District of Columbia. However, the same claims were allowed to endure in all remaining states.

Dismissal of wrongful death and survival claims also varied from state to state.

Spokespersons for Meta, Google, Snap Inc. and ByteDance did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The ruling is part of a multidistrict proceeding consolidating hundreds of personal injury lawsuits on behalf of children and adolescents by school districts, local governments and state attorneys general. These plaintiffs claim that Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, Google’s YouTube, ByteDance’s TikTok and Snap’s Snapchat are designed to foster compulsive use by minors.

In a joint lawsuit filed in late 2023, 33 states claimed that Meta built a business model that maximizes young users’ time on its platforms and employs psychologically manipulative platform features. They accused the tech behemoth of publishing misleading reports on user harm and continuing to downplay the negative consequences of its products.

This case was filed in the Northern District of California.