Tech companies sue California over youth law
Google, Meta and TikTok seek to block a ban on addictive feeds for minors.
Listen to this article
There is no audio version yet. Request one and an AI voice will read the article aloud.
Read by an AI voice.
Google, Meta and TikTok have sued California to block a new youth law. From 1 January 2027, the law will ban endless scrolling and automatically played videos, among other features, for users under 16.
The three companies have sued California. They argue that the law violates their constitutional right to free speech and that the state is interfering with how platforms select and display posts.
The law requires platforms to take reasonable measures to prevent minors from accessing so-called addictive features. These include personalised feeds, autoplay and other designs that, according to the law, keep users on a platform for longer.
The companies also argue that the US Communications Decency Act protects them from liability for posts by third parties. California Attorney General Rob Bonta has said that his office is studying the lawsuits and will defend the law.
The lawsuits form part of a broader US battle over the effects of social media on young people. Schools, governments and families have filed thousands of cases accusing platforms of deliberately designing features that make it difficult for young people to stop using them.
For users in the Netherlands, the lawsuits will make no difference for the time being. A ruling could, however, affect how much scope US states and European regulators have to regulate the design of social platforms for children.
Also show the region and a close-up
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The companies have filed separate lawsuits.
- The law restricts certain platform features for users under 16.
- The law is due to take effect on 1 January 2027, unless a court prevents it.
Left
Arguments The government must protect children from commercial designs that encourage prolonged and intensive use.
Values Children's rights, public health and protection against power imbalances between families and technology companies.
Consequences Supporters expect fewer harmful online stimuli, but accept stricter age checks and less freedom of choice.
Centre
Arguments Regulation may be justified, but must be precise and remain workable without broad censorship or unnecessary data collection.
Values Proportionality, legal certainty and the protection of minors.
Consequences A compromise could consist of age-based design rules, transparency and independent oversight.
Right
Arguments The state should be cautious about rules determining how companies rank information and which features users may see.
Values Free speech, freedom to conduct business and individual responsibility.
Consequences Supporters fear a precedent, government interference in content choices and additional monitoring of users.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The core facts have been confirmed by AP, Reuters and the Californian authorities. The legal arguments are presented as the companies' positions.
Editor's note
The lawsuits have been confirmed by AP and Reuters. The law's ultimate validity and the outcome of the proceedings remain uncertain.Sources
- Google, Meta and TikTok sue California over law designed to protect children from social media harms — Associated Press
- Google, Meta, TikTok sue to block California youth social media law — Reuters via Investing.com
- Governor Newsom signs child-safety social media laws — State of California
More on this in Dutch media
- NU.nl — „sociale media”
- De Telegraaf — „sociale media”
- de Volkskrant — „sociale media”