EPIC, Bipartisan Group of States Support State Litigation Against Meta Addicting Minors
A bipartisan group of eleven states, led by New Hampshire and Vermont, filed an amicus brief Monday in support of California's litigation against Meta in an online safety case concerning addicting children. The brief highlights other state litigation that has found the Communications Decency Act (CDA) doesn't immunize the social media platform against claims that it employs coercive design features that addict minors. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) also filed a brief Monday supporting California.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Privacy Daily provides accurate coverage of newsworthy developments in data protection legislation, regulation, litigation, and enforcement for privacy professionals responsible for ensuring effective organizational data privacy compliance.
"At least eighteen state court decisions across fourteen states have held that social media addiction claims -- including claims that defendants incorporated addictive design features into their platforms and that defendants deceived the public about the safety of their platforms -- are not barred by the CDA," the brief said. The basis of these decisions "is that the states’ claims are not treating social media companies as the publisher or speaker of third-party content. Rather, the states are seeking to hold social media companies liable for their own conduct of incorporating addictive design features into their platforms and misrepresenting the safety of those platforms."
"In addition to state trial courts refusing to dismiss social media addiction claims as barred by the CDA, state appellate courts routinely decline to take interlocutory review of those decisions," the brief added.
The People of the State of California v. Meta, filed in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, attempts to get Meta to address claims that its business model and practices are harming children. The case is on appeal from the U.S. District Court for Northern California (case 23-05448) (see 2310240060, 2310250066 and 2504250049).
“Meta’s business model is built around addicting teens and children to their platforms using algorithms and deceptive practices that exploit the vulnerabilities of these youth,” said Vermont Attorney General Charity Clark (D) in a press release Tuesday. “I brought a lawsuit against Meta to stop these harms, and now I’m supporting other states in their lawsuits against Meta as well."
When Congress passed Section 230 of the CDA, it "did not intend to give internet companies blanket immunity for every claim related to publishing user-generated content," EPIC's amicus brief said. "Denying Meta Section 230 protections in this case will not destroy speech and innovation on the internet. Instead, it will protect speech and innovation while incentivizing companies to design and run their services in ways that benefit users."