Technology Companies Challenge California’s Social Media Law

Google, Meta Platforms and TikTok have filed separate lawsuits against California in an effort to prevent enforcement of a new law designed to reduce the risk of compulsive social media use among children under 16.

The legislation, known as Assembly Bill 1709, prohibits platforms from offering certain features described as “psychologically exploitative” when used by underage children. These include personalized content recommendations and autoplay functions that automatically play successive videos.

The law also requires platforms to delete children’s accounts that use the restricted features.

In lawsuits filed on Wednesday, the companies argued that California is improperly dictating how they present content to younger users. They contend that the legislation replaces parental judgment with the state’s preferred approach to managing children’s online experiences.

First Amendment and Section 230 at the Center of the Dispute

The companies argue that Assembly Bill 1709 violates the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which protects freedom of speech. They also challenge the legislation under Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act, which broadly protects online platforms from liability relating to user-generated content.

Google, which owns YouTube through its parent company Alphabet, said the legislation could undermine systems designed to help children find age-appropriate videos.

Meta argued that California cannot override its editorial decisions concerning the curation and presentation of billions of posts. The company also questioned why the law targets its services while children remain able to use other platforms offering similar features.

TikTok maintained that protected speech cannot be restricted simply because lawmakers consider certain ideas or images unsuitable for younger audiences.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights advocacy organization, also criticized the legislation, describing it as a potential threat to privacy and free speech.

California Pledges to Defend the Legislation

California Governor Gavin Newsom signed the legislation on September 10, arguing that children’s safety should be central to technology policy.

The office of Attorney General Rob Bonta, the sole defendant in the lawsuits, said it was reviewing the legal challenges and remained committed to defending the state’s laws intended to protect children online.

Assembly Bill 1709 is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2027, unless a judge invalidates the legislation or places enforcement on hold.

The lawsuits were filed in separate federal courts: Google brought its case in San Jose, Meta filed in San Francisco, and TikTok sued in Los Angeles.

Broader Legal Pressure on Social Media Companies

The California dispute comes amid increasing legal and regulatory scrutiny of social media platforms over their impact on younger users.

Numerous US states have introduced measures addressing children’s access to social media, while other countries have pursued similar restrictions. Australia, for example, has implemented a ban on social media use for children under 16.

The companies also face broader financial and legal exposure. In August, Meta agreed to pay up to $18 billion and restrict teenagers’ use of Facebook and Instagram under agreements with nearly all US states. Those states had accused the company of violating privacy and consumer protection laws.

Google, Meta, TikTok and Snap, the parent company of Snapchat, continue to face thousands of lawsuits brought by individuals, school districts, municipalities and other government entities. The claims allege that social media platforms contributed to compulsive use and a youth mental health crisis involving harms such as anxiety, depression and suicide.

What Investors Should Watch Next

The legal proceedings will determine whether California can enforce its restrictions on social media features designed to retain user attention among children under 16. A court decision blocking or delaying the law could affect the timing and scope of compliance requirements for major platforms.

For technology companies, the dispute adds another dimension to regulatory exposure involving platform design, content distribution, privacy and youth safety. The outcome could also influence how other jurisdictions approach restrictions on recommendation systems and automated video features.