bbieron@platformeconomyinsights.com

Social Media Companies Sue to Block California Law Banning Personalized Feeds

Nov 1, 2025

Report from MediaPost

In Brief – Google, Meta, and TikTok have filed federal lawsuits and urged a federal judge to temporarily block enforcement of California’s “Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act” that restricts personalized or “addictive” content feeds for users under 18 unless a parent consents. The companies argue the law is overly broad and clearly violates the First Amendment by interfering with their editorial discretion to curate content, comparing the restrictions to the state dictating how newspapers select to place articles on a page or how libraries order books. They also claim that California’s definition of “addictive” improperly targets what are essentially personalized, interest-based recommendation systems that are themselves forms of protected expression. The suits follow a September ruling by a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that largely upheld SB 976 and rejected the ability of NetChoice, a tech company trade group, to challenge the law, determining that only companies harmed by the law could bring a challenge. Beginning in January, social media platforms in California will be required to verify the age of users and stop personalized feeds for minors.

Context – Most of the recent flood of state laws regulating social media sites have been blocked by federal judges ruling that they violate the First Amendment, but that trend is increasingly mixed due to a compilation of indecisive Supreme Court decisions in internet-related cases. For example, five Supreme Court Justices in Moody v NetChoice agreed that social media platforms engage in expressive activity strongly protected by First Amendment, but the court’s core decision was to demand a more specific, platform-by-platform analysis, and Justice Barrett, one of the five, questioned whether some algorithms involve protected speech at all. The Ninth Circuit decision builds on Barrett’s question. In 2023, the court chose not to rule on whether Sec. 230 protected YouTube’s algorithmic decisions. And the recent Supreme Court ruling on age verification for online porn is quickly being stretched to cover other online teen activity like social media usage, which Justice Kavanaugh says probably violates the First Amendment, but nobody can be sure until much more litigation plays out.

View By Monthly
Latest Blog
SpaceXAI Fails to Block Minnesota Law Banning “Nudification” Apps

Report from Politico In Brief – Federal Judge Donovan Frank rejected SpaceXAI’s effort to block Minnesota’s law banning the creation of sexually explicit deepfake images while the company challenges the measure. Frank said the company, then xAI, waited too long to...

Australia Digital Duty of Care Law to Require Algorithm Choice

Report from ABC News Australia In Brief – The Australian Government has released draft legislation to add a Digital Duty of Care to the Online Safety Act of 2021. A key provision is the “My Feed, My Way” initiative requiring social media platforms to give all users a...

Google Updates Gmail Spam Filters for Political Fundraising

Report from Campaigns & Elections In Brief – Google has put in place a Gmail policy that will make it somewhat easier for political campaigns and committees to reach personal Gmail inboxes by allowing eligible political entities to become “verified senders,” bypassing...

Platform Economy Insights produces a short email four times a week that reviews two top stories with concise analysis. It is the best way to keep on top of the news you should know. Sign up for this free email here.

* indicates required