Google, Meta and TikTok have filed separate lawsuits against California in an attempt to block a new social media law designed to protect children under 16 from addictive platform features, including endless scrolling, personalised feeds and automatically playing videos.
The legal action challenges a law that is scheduled to take effect on 1 January 2027. The legislation aims to limit children’s exposure to social media features that critics say encourage excessive screen time and make it difficult for young users to stop browsing.
Signed into law by California Governor Gavin Newsom in September, the legislation requires technology companies to prevent children under 16 from accessing certain features considered addictive. These include continuously scrolling content feeds and videos that play automatically without users having to select them. Companies must also introduce what the law describes as “reasonable measures” to verify users’ ages and restrict access to these features.
Google, Meta and TikTok have challenged the legislation in separate cases filed in federal courts in San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Jose. The companies argue that the law infringes on their constitutional rights, particularly the First Amendment protection of freedom of expression.
They also contend that the legislation conflicts with Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. The provision generally protects online platforms from legal liability for content posted by their users, although its protections are subject to exceptions.
The lawsuits come as social media companies face growing legal and political pressure over the effects of their platforms on children and teenagers. Schools, government authorities and individual plaintiffs in the United States and other countries have brought thousands of cases involving allegations that social media platforms contribute to addiction, mental health problems and other harms among young users.
The legal pressure is also increasing in Europe. Meta and Snap, for example, have faced scrutiny in court proceedings in countries including France, Italy, Denmark and the Netherlands over allegations concerning the impact of social media on teenagers.
In August, Meta agreed to pay up to $18 billion (approximately EUR 16 billion) and strengthen child-safety measures on Facebook and Instagram as part of a major legal settlement in the United States. The agreement ended a trial involving claims brought by nearly all 48 participating states. The case focused on allegations that features on Meta’s platforms were designed to keep young users engaged for extended periods, contributing to concerns about children’s mental health.
TikTok also reached a settlement with Alabama in September over allegations involving addictive platform features, adding to the legal challenges facing major social media companies.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office, which is named as the defendant in the three lawsuits, said on 2 November that it was reviewing the legal filings. The office also reaffirmed its commitment to defending state laws intended to protect children online.
The technology companies have rejected the suggestion that the California legislation is an appropriate way to address online safety concerns.
TikTok described the law as “a blatantly unconstitutional restriction on free expression”. The company argued that allowing users to receive content based on their preferences is a long-established practice also used by bookstores, television networks and streaming services.
The platform said it had already introduced several measures to improve safety for younger users. It also argued that the legislation disregards progress made by technology companies and interferes with parents’ ability to decide what content and features are suitable for their children.
Meta raised similar constitutional concerns, arguing that the government should not determine how online platforms organise, display or distribute information.
In a statement, the company said the law could force it to remove features intended to make teenagers’ experiences more age-appropriate or prevent thousands of young Californians from accessing their family members, friends and online communities.
Google also defended its approach to online safety, saying parents are best placed to make decisions about their children’s digital activities. The company pointed to its existing parental controls and other safety tools as evidence of efforts to protect younger users.
Google spokesperson José Castañeda argued that the legislation could have unintended consequences for children. “Overly broad laws like this actually break the systems we’ve built to help kids find high-quality, age-appropriate videos,” he said.
The legal dispute highlights a growing disagreement over who should be responsible for protecting children on social media and how far governments can go in regulating the design of digital platforms.
For California, the central issue is whether restrictions on features such as endless scrolling and autoplay can be introduced as child-protection measures without violating constitutional protections. For the technology companies, the challenge is about maintaining control over how their platforms recommend and present content.
The outcome of the lawsuits could determine whether California can enforce its planned restrictions from January 2027 and may influence how other governments approach the regulation of social media features used by children.
