Judge skeptical of Meta’s arguments in social media addiction class action

Social media addiction class action lawsuit overview:

• Who: A California federal judge appears to be unconvinced by Meta and other social media companies’ arguments in favor of dismissing a social media addiction class action lawsuit.
• Why: The judge said Meta and its co-defendants have been less than transparent about the workings of their platforms.
• Where: The social media addiction class action lawsuits were consolidated in California federal court.

At a recent hearing for a massive social media addiction class action lawsuit, a California judge seemed unconvinced by Meta’s arguments in favor of dismissing claims of 34 state attorneys general over the allegedly addictive nature of its social media platforms.

U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzales Rogers said Meta and its co-defendants have not been transparent about their social media platform designs and that it was plausible for the state attorneys general to obtain psychiatric treatment documentation to show economic harm.

Google LLC, Snap Inc., TikTok Inc. and others joined Meta’s motion to dismiss claims from the social media addiction class action lawsuit. They also asked the judge to dismiss three personal injury claims, Law360 reports.

The social media addiction class action lawsuit was consolidated as multidistrict litigation in 2022 and involves claims from school districts, parents and state attorneys general who claim the social media giants were designed to be addictive, posing particular harm to minors’ mental health.

Social media use has led to eating disorders, anxiety, insomnia and other health issues, and it costs money to treat these conditions, the states argued.

Social media addiction class action lawsuit likely to survive Meta’s dismissal effort

Judge Gonzalez Rogers said she was concerned “there hasn’t been much transparency … in terms of how these platforms were operating and what they were doing.”

The social media companies said the judge should toss all of the states’ claims, including claims asserted under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, The Federal Trade Commission Act and state consumer protection laws. Meta argued the companies are shielded from liability by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

They also argued the states had not presented sufficient arguments to show the social media products are “child-directed” or that they had “actual knowledge” they were collecting information from children under the age of 13.

Judge Gonzales Rogers noted she is only responsible for deciding whether the claims are plausible enough to survive a motion to dismiss at this stage and is not deciding claims on the merits.

Do you think Judge Gonzales Rogers should dismiss the social media addiction class action lawsuit? Join the discussion in the comments.

The personal injury plaintiffs are represented by Lexi Joy Hazam and Gabriel August Panek of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP and Previn Warren of Motley Rice LLC.

The social media addiction class action lawsuit is In re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, Case No. 4:22-md-03047, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Tribes sue social platforms over native youth suicides
• Supreme Court rules public officials can block people on social media
• Apple class action claims company limits third-party storage services
• 9th Circuit hears objections to $90M Facebook privacy settlement