Social media addiction MDL court dismisses some claims

Social media addiction MDL overview:

• Who: A California federal judge dismissed some claims against social media companies, including Meta and Snap, involved in a multidistrict litigation (MDL).
• Why: The judge dismissed claims of violations of criminal child sex abuse material (CSAM) statutes and certain survival and loss of consortium claims.
• Where: The social media addiction MDL was filed in California federal court.
• How to Get Help: If your child has suffered mental health issues linked to using Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, or Snapchat, you may have legal options. See if you qualify.

A California federal judge dismissed some claims in a multidistrict litigation arguing social media companies, such as Meta, are responsible for causing addiction and personal injuries to their adolescent users.

U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzales Rogers dismissed claims of violations of CSAM statutes and certain survival and loss of consortium claims filed against Facebook’s parent company Meta and Snap.

However, claims of general negligence and wrongful death were allowed to proceed, while some — but not all — survival and loss of consortium claims were dismissed due to certain states not recognizing such claims. 

“The Court clarifies that plaintiffs’ claims of wrongful death, survival and loss of consortium remain operative only to the same extent as their ‘underlying’ personal injury claims,” the judge wrote.

The personal injury plaintiffs argue Snap, Meta and other social media companies failed to implement age verification and parental controls and designed their platforms to foster addiction and compulsive use among young users.

Social media addiction MDL claims companies knew of harmful consequences

The plaintiffs further argue that the social media companies knew of the harmful consequences of their conduct and failed to take steps to prevent it. 

Meanwhile, the judge ruled the plaintiffs’ claims that the social media companies had a duty to exercise reasonable care to avoid causing harm to young users were plausible, and that their conduct was not protected by neither Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act nor the First Amendment.

However, the judge did rule that Section 230 barred the plaintiffs from bringing civil claims under federal CSAM statutes, which prohibit the knowing distribution or possession of child pornography.

The plaintiffs alleged that Meta and Snap possessed and distributed CSAM on their platforms, but the judge said such claims were based on the companies’ failure to remove third-party content, which is protected by Section 230.

A group of 28 plaintiffs from around the United States asked a judicial panel in 2022 to consolidate their cases against Facebook, Instagram and Meta. 

The judge ruled in 2024 that the social media companies needed to face the majority of the claims brought against them by school districts and local government entities, arguing they purposely designed their platforms to be addictive for children. 

Do you have a teenager who was injured by a social media company? You may qualify to join a free class action lawsuit investigation. 

The social media addiction MDL is In re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, Case No. 4:22-md-03047-YGR, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• RoC class action alleges retinol cleanser ineffective
• Whole Foods class action claims 365 Plant-Based Flushable Wipes not plant-based
• Chosen Foods class action alleges avocado oil falsely advertised as non-GMO
• Children’s car seats recalled due to risk of neck injury