The Ninth Circuit allowed 2,400 addiction lawsuits to move forward without addressing Section 230.

      UPDATE, 10 August 2026, 21:00 CEST: The Ninth Circuit has declined to delay the initial trial. Meta had requested an emergency stay while its appeal was in process. The court deemed this request moot, citing the same reasoning as the initial ruling: it currently lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

      As a result, the trial date remains unchanged. Jury selection is set to begin on Wednesday in federal court in Oakland, California, with opening arguments scheduled for 18 August. The trial could extend over the course of several weeks.

      Bloomberg's Isaiah Poritz reported the denial. Circuit Judge Jacqueline Nguyen authored the opinion in Personal Injury Plaintiffs v. Meta Platforms, Inc., 9th Cir., No. 24-7037. Meta did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

      The broader legal landscape is evolving as well. New Mexico's total claims against Meta now amount to nearly $950 million, which combines the $375 million verdict from March with a $567 million youth mental health fund ordered by a judge on 7 August.

      Additionally, there are other ongoing cases. A trial in Tennessee is currently underway, while a jury in Los Angeles awarded a woman $6 million in a case against Meta and Google’s YouTube. The first trials involving school districts are not set to commence until February 2027.

      The Ninth Circuit handed a setback to the social media companies on Monday, though it did not provide a formal ruling.

      The San Francisco appeals court rejected their attempt to overturn a lower court's decision and halt approximately 2,400 federal lawsuits asserting that the companies designed their products to create addictive behaviors in young users. Reuters’ Diana Novak Jones reported the decision from Chicago.

      The panel's inaction carries more significance than what it resolved. Meta Platforms, Alphabet’s Google, ByteDance’s TikTok, and Snap contended that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 shields them not only from liability for user-generated posts but also from claims of failing to warn about addictive designs.

      However, the court did not address that point, stating that the appeal was premature. Typically, appeals occur after a trial, allowing for a district judge’s decision to be reviewed once the case concludes.

      This issue was flagged by the judges back in January.

      The panel had already indicated concerns during oral arguments on 6 January. Circuit Judges Jacqueline Nguyen and Mark Bennett were joined by District Judge Kiyo Matsumoto from the Eastern District of New York.

      Meta’s attorney James Rouhandeh advocated for a broad interpretation of the statute. “It would be a significant burden to require defendants to defend against these types of lawsuits,” he told the judges.

      Nguyen provided a pointed response: “When Congress chooses to grant immunity from lawsuits, it knows how to articulate that.”

      Colorado's solicitor general Shannon Stevenson represented the state interests, arguing that the features in question operate independently of any user-generated content. “Our complaints concern features that they can address without referencing any third-party content."

      Reuters notes that one judge remarked Congress could have created a clear protection against broad liability if it intended to do so. However, this should be viewed as a signal, not a definitive ruling, as it was not put to a vote.

      The sequence of events has shifted.

      Focus on the ruling’s implications rather than its wording. The companies sought clarity on the immunity issue first and trial matters later. Instead, they will face trials first, with the immunity issue to be addressed subsequently, post-verdict.

      This timing is significant. According to Reuters, there are roughly 2,400 lawsuits in front of U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, filed by states, municipalities, school districts, and individuals seeking damages, penalties, and restitution. Additionally, around 3,300 more cases are consolidated in California state court.

      The companies appealed Rogers’ decisions from 2023 and 2024, which largely allowed the litigation to proceed. Three years of appeals focused on scheduling have led to this ruling.

      Meta is set to confront four states on 18 August.

      Rogers permitted the states to pursue their claims on 1 July, finding significant disputes regarding whether the products contribute to addiction among minors and whether Meta intentionally targeted this demographic. Twenty-nine states are pursuing distinct claims under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act.

      California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey will initiate their case against Meta on 18 August. Meta informed the court that these four states are seeking $1.4 trillion in penalties, a sum close to its total market value. “A sanction of that magnitude has no precedent in the history of consumer protection enforcement,” it contended.

      Juries have already delivered verdicts twice.

      A Los Angeles jury issued the first verdict in March, determining that Meta and Google acted negligently in designing platforms that harm youth, awarding $6 million to a 20-year-old woman who claims to have developed an addiction to Instagram and YouTube as