A U.S. appeals court has allowed thousands of lawsuits against major social media companies to proceed, rejecting arguments that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields them from claims they designed addictive products for young users. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the appeal was premature, as Section 230 provides a defense to liability, not immunity from suit . This decision lets approximately 2,400 federal lawsuits move forward, filed by states, municipalities, school districts, and individuals . The court also denied Meta's bid to postpone a trial beginning Wednesday in a case brought by 29 state attorneys general .
In a separate landmark case, a New Mexico judge ordered Meta to pay $567 million for creating a "public nuisance" that harmed children's mental health, on top of $375 million in civil penalties from a March jury verdict, bringing total liability to $942 million . Judge Bryan Biedscheid ordered sweeping changes, including a 90-hour monthly usage limit for teens, restrictions on notifications, and improved age verification . Meta has vowed to appeal, stating it is "confident in our record of protecting teens online" .
Public opinion is shifting toward regulation: a Reuters/Ipsos poll found 61% of Americans favor stronger oversight of social media companies, and 66% support age-verification laws . In India, a BJP MP has introduced a private bill to restrict children's social media use, reflecting global legislative efforts . The Indian government is also examining whether Meta's recommendation systems fit its intermediary status under the IT Act .
The first federal trial begins in Oakland, California, on August 18, with states seeking $1.4 trillion in damages . Meta argues that social media addiction is not a recognized diagnosis in the DSM, a key point of contention .
