Google, Meta, and TikTok Sue California Over New Teen Social Media Limits

Google, Meta, and TikTok have filed separate lawsuits to block a new California law that limits how social media platforms operate for teenagers. The companies argue that the state is overreaching its authority and interfering with constitutional rights. The legislation, known as Assembly Bill 1709, is scheduled to take effect in January. It targets four specific features that platforms use to keep users engaged: infinite scrolling, autoplay, recommendation algorithms, and push notifications.

The bill, sponsored by Long Beach Assemblymember Josh Lowenthal, restricts these features for users under the age of 16. Lowenthal said the goal is to stop tech companies from using tools designed to hold minors' attention for profit. He described the industry as a multi-trillion dollar machine that exploits children's focus to generate revenue. The measure passed the California legislature with unanimous bipartisan support.

Google, the parent company of YouTube, argued that parents should have the final say on their children's internet experience. A Google spokesperson stated that the company already offers various protections, including default settings that turn off autoplay for users under 18. The company also allows parents to completely disable YouTube Shorts. Google contends that limiting content discovery features could prevent teenagers from finding educational videos and other age-appropriate material. The company said it proposed changes to the bill during the legislative process to improve it.

Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, raised similar First Amendment concerns. A Meta spokesperson said the law allows the government to dictate how ideas are organized and shared with Californians. The company warned that the restrictions would force it to remove features that make the platform age-appropriate or isolate thousands of California teens from their families and communities. Meta stated it is challenging the law to protect these constitutional rights and existing safety tools.

TikTok also filed a lawsuit, asserting that the state is exceeding its power. A TikTok spokesperson called the bill an unconstitutional restriction on free speech. The company noted that its teen accounts come with more than 50 default settings for safety, privacy, and protection. TikTok also highlighted its Family Pairing feature, which helps parents customize their children's experience. The platform has disabled direct messages for users under 16 since 2020. The company argued that the law ignores these real-world advancements and takes away parents' right to decide what is appropriate for their kids.

One central point of contention is whether the government should impose restrictions on teens even when parents approve of their social media use. Lowenthal responded to this argument by comparing it to other health and safety rules. He said parents are not allowed to let their children go into a casino or a bar, nor can they decide if a minor needs a helmet on a bike or a car seat. He classified the bill as a public health matter that stands above parental control.

Lowenthal rejected the First Amendment claims, saying the legislation was drafted to fit existing judicial precedents. He emphasized that the bill does not regulate content itself. He noted that he expected the lawsuits as part of standard corporate strategy. Lowenthal accused the companies of using the courts to delay implementation while they continue to earn billions of dollars in profits. He called this a calculated strategy where time is money.

The companies denied these accusations, stating their suits aim to protect constitutional rights and user access to online communities. Lowenthal clarified that he does not want to ban social media entirely for minors. He said he would prefer the companies remove the addictive features themselves to avoid social isolation. He believes social media has positive aspects that children can use as long as the platforms are not harmful. The law also creates an eSafety Commission to monitor technology trends and advise lawmakers on future protections. Lowenthal expressed confidence that California Attorney General Rob Bonta will defend the legislation in court.