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
Major Brazilian Law to Protect Teens on Social Media Goes into Effect

Report from AP News In Brief – A Brazilian law enacted last September to shield minors from harmful online content has taken effect with experts calling it a milestone in the protection of children and adolescents. The Digital Statute of Children and Adolescents does...

European Commission Expands Their DSA Probe of Online Porn Sites

Report from CBC News In Brief – The European Commission has announced that they have preliminarily found four large adult content platforms to be in breach of the Digital Services Act (DSA) for failing to protect minors from being exposed to pornographic content on...

UK Government Targeting Manosphere Content on Online Platforms

Report from The Guardian In Brief – More than 60 Labour MPs have urged Ofcom, the country’s communications and digital regulator, to use its authority under the Online Safety Act to press platforms to better protect young men from risks they argue are linked to...

Google Proposes a Publisher Opt-Out for AI-Enabled Search in the UK

Report from MediaPost In Brief – Google has outlined plans to give publishers more authority over how their content appears in AI-driven search features in response to the consultation by the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) regarding application of the...

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