After whistleblower revelations that Meta was aware of how its platforms harmed teens, Meta launched teen safety tools aimed at giving parents more oversight. The company has previously used influencers to promote those features around the world as an alternative to social media bans or limits similar to Australia’s.
The companies and Snapchat parent Snap still face thousands of lawsuits by individuals, school districts, municipalities and other government entities claiming they sought to addict children and caused a mental health crisis that resulted in harms such as anxiety, depression and suicide.
Google, which owns YouTube and is a unit of Alphabet, filed in federal court in San Jose. Meta, owner of Facebook and Instagram, sued in San Francisco. TikTok sued in Los Angeles.
Google has come under fire more recently over the use of its AI tools on school devices, including cases in which a student had access to AI mode through a school-issued Google Chromebook.
If the law takes effect as written, platforms would have to strip specified features from underage users and delete accounts that retain them, a change the companies say would disrupt systems they built to surface age-appropriate video.
Other critics also accused California of overreaching. Many U.S. states already regulate children’s access to social media, and countries around the world have similar restrictions, including Australia’s ban on social media for children under 16.
The companies argue the statute is too broad and would override how they curate and display content. Meta said in its lawsuit that California cannot override its editorial judgments about how to curate and display billions of posts, while leaving children free to spend unlimited time on other online platforms that offer similar services.
California’s response framed the fight as a defense of child-protection rules. “Our office is committed to defending California’s commonsense laws to protect kids online,” it said. “Overly broad laws like this actually break the systems we’ve built to help kids find high-quality, age-appropriate videos,” Meta said. TikTok said protected speech “cannot be suppressed solely to protect the young from ideas or images that a legislative body thinks unsuitable.”.