Social Media Giants dodge School Districts' claims of fostering student addiction

Social Media Companies Win Dismissal of School District Lawsuits

Meta Platforms Inc. and other leading social media companies have secured a dismissal of lawsuits brought by numerous school districts. These districts aimed to recover costs associated with mitigating the negative effects of students’ social media use. A California state judge ruled in favor of Meta, Snap Inc., TikTok Inc., and Google LLC, rejecting the claims that social media has increased educational costs due to student distraction and disruptions necessitating additional classroom discipline, employee training, and parent communication.

Limits on Liability

In her ruling, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carolyn Kuhl emphasized the necessity for limits on liability to prevent broad, indeterminate suits against companies for "emotional harm" leading to subsequent individual misbehavior. She illustrated her point with an analogy where a restaurateur serving spoiled food wouldn’t be liable for a car accident caused by a diner suffering from food poisoning.

Public Nuisance Theory

The school districts contended that social media platforms, through algorithms and features like the “like” button, are designed to hook young users, causing societal harm similar to the addictive nature of cigarettes. They claimed significant resources were allocated to managing the consequences of social media, including damage to school property from platform-circulated challenges.

However, the social media companies argued they aren’t responsible for third-party content. Meta, in a statement, expressed satisfaction with the court's decision and reiterated its commitment to supporting young users and their families.

Evaluating Appellate Options

As of a recent court filing, the coordinated cases included 617 school district plaintiffs from 34 states. Judge Kuhl heard arguments from four school districts serving as test plaintiffs representing common claims across the broader litigation. The school districts expressed disappointment with the decision and are evaluating appellate options, indicating they would continue to advocate for districts still actively pursuing claims.

Challenges of Legal Theory

Judge Kuhl noted the steep challenges the school districts faced using the public nuisance legal theory, which they had previously applied against vape pen sellers. She stated that the federal liability shield under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act is a significant barrier, preventing the extension of public nuisance theory to cover indirect impacts on school districts from youth social media addiction.

Ongoing Federal Case

While the state case in Los Angeles provides a precedent, a federal judge in Oakland overseeing a substantial number of similar cases is expected to rule soon. Both the Los Angeles and Oakland judges are also managing personal injury lawsuits from youths and their families, accusing social media companies of causing psychological distress and even suicides. Although some claims have been allowed to proceed, others have been dismissed.

The ongoing state case is titled Social Media Cases JCCP 22STCV21355 in the California Superior Court, County of Los Angeles.