2026-08-10T16:13:53.516Z / 路透社
2025年12月9日拍摄的资料图片显示，在澳大利亚一项禁止16岁以下用户使用社交媒体的新法律出台前，手机屏幕上显示着Instagram、TikTok、Snapchat、YouTube、Facebook、Twitch和Reddit应用程序。REUTERS/霍莉·亚当斯/资料图 购买授权
- 第九巡回法院称《通信规范法案》第230条提供责任抗辩而非豁免，因此上诉为时过早
- 上诉法院同时驳回Meta推迟由29个州总检察长提起的审判的请求
- 联邦诉讼涵盖超过3000起案件
8月10日（路透社）——美国一家上诉法院周一允许数千起诉讼继续推进，这些诉讼指控Meta平台公司（纽约证券交易所代码：META.O）、 Alphabet旗下的谷歌（纽约证券交易所代码：GOOGL.O）、字节跳动旗下的TikTok以及其他社交媒体公司刻意设计产品以让年轻用户上瘾。
总部位于旧金山的美国第九巡回上诉法院驳回了这些公司推翻下级法院裁决的请求，该裁决要求它们应对联邦法院提起的超过3000起相关诉讼。法院认为，在当前诉讼阶段提出上诉为时过早。
路透社每日简报通讯为您提供开启一天所需的全部新闻。点击此处订阅。
广告报道
被告方还包括Snap Inc.（纽约证券交易所代码：SNAP.N）旗下的Snapchat，它们辩称，1996年《通信规范法案》第230条通常保护在线公司免于为用户发布的内容承担责任，该条款也应禁止针对它们未就平台成瘾性向公众发出警告的诉讼。
大多数上诉都是在案件作出最终判决或裁决后提出的。Meta曾辩称，第230条为其提供了广泛的豁免权，使其能够立即对下级法院的裁决提起上诉。但第九巡回法院表示，第230条提供的是责任抗辩，而非免于诉讼的豁免权，因此上诉尚不成熟。
法院同时驳回了Meta推迟定于周三开庭的审判的请求。该诉讼由29个州总检察长提起，指控Meta非法收集和使用儿童数据、刻意设计社交媒体平台以吸引年轻用户，并在平台安全性问题上误导消费者。Meta曾辩称，在上诉未决期间，审判无法进行。
Meta的一名代表以及上诉案首席律师的发言人未立即回复置评请求。
数千起诉讼
这些诉讼由各州、市政府、学区和个人提起，指控社交媒体公司故意让年轻用户上瘾，导致近年来美国年轻人中抑郁症、焦虑症和身体形象问题激增，并加剧了更广泛的心理健康危机。
家长、学区、各州及其他原告辩称，审判法院的裁决并非终局性裁决，因此无法提起上诉。但他们也反对这些公司关于第230条的论点，称该条款并不涵盖与公司运营和产品设计相关的索赔。
这些案件已被集中交由加利福尼亚州奥克兰的美国地区法官伊冯·冈萨雷斯·罗杰斯审理，原告要求这些公司赔偿损失、处以罚款并返还不当得利。这些公司曾在2023年和2024年对罗杰斯的裁决提起上诉，这些裁决基本上允许诉讼继续进行。
除联邦诉讼外，这些公司还在州法院面临数百起类似索赔的诉讼，其中约3300起案件在加利福尼亚州法院进行合并审理。
在加利福尼亚州诉讼中首批进入审判程序的案件——也是陪审团可能如何应对类似索赔的密切关注的测试案——中，洛杉矶陪审团于今年3月认定Meta和谷歌在设计伤害年轻人的社交媒体平台方面存在过失。陪审团向一名现年20岁的女性判给了600万美元赔偿金，该女子称自己童年时期就对Instagram和YouTube上瘾。
此外，Meta在新墨西哥州提起的一起具有里程碑意义的州法院诉讼中两度败诉。今年3月，陪审团认定Meta在平台安全性问题上误导消费者，判令其支付3.75亿美元赔偿金。周四，一名法官认定Meta造成了公共妨害，判令其额外支付5.67亿美元赔偿金，并实施青少年安全措施。
Meta和谷歌均否认这些案件中的指控，并表示将提起上诉。
戴安娜·诺瓦克·琼斯在芝加哥报道，亚历克西亚·加拉姆法尔维、马修·刘易斯和戴维·巴里奥编辑
我们的准则：路透社信托原则。
戴安娜负责报道产品责任、诉讼、集体侵权和原告律师行业。她此前曾任职于Law360和《芝加哥太阳时报》。
US court rules Meta, other tech companies must face thousands of lawsuits over social media addiction
2026-08-10T16:13:53.516Z / Reuters
Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, Facebook, Twitch and Reddit applications are displayed on a mobile phone ahead of new law banning social media for users under 16 in Australia, in this picture illustration taken on December 9, 2025. REUTERS/Hollie Adams/Illustration Purchase Licensing Rights
- 9th Circuit says Section 230 offers liability defense, not immunity, so appeal is too soon
- Appeals court also rejects Meta request to delay trial brought by 29 state attorneys general
- Federal litigation covers more than 3,000 suits
Aug 10 (Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court on Monday allowed thousands of lawsuits to move forward against Meta Platforms
META.O, Alphabet’s
GOOGL.OGoogle, ByteDance’s TikTok, and other social media companies over claims they designed their products to be addictive to young users.
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the companies’ bid to reverse a lower court’s ruling forcing them to face more than 3,000 lawsuits over the claims filed in federal court, concluding that the appeal came too early in the litigation.
The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.
Report Ad
The defendants, which also include Snap Inc’s
SNAP.N
Snapchat, had argued that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 — which generally shields online companies from claims over content posted by their users – also bars lawsuits claiming they failed to warn the public about the addictive nature of their platforms.
Most appeals come after a case has concluded with a ruling or a verdict. Meta had argued that Section 230 provided it broad immunity and that it should be able to appeal the lower court’s decision immediately. But the 9th Circuit said Section 230 provides a defense to liability, not immunity from lawsuits, so the appeal was premature.
The court also denied Meta’s bid to postpone a trial beginning Wednesday in a lawsuit brought by 29 state attorneys general alleging that the company illegally collected and used children’s data, designed their social media platforms to keep young users hooked, and misled consumers about their safety. The company had argued that the trial couldn’t go forward while the appeal had been outstanding.
A representative for Meta and a spokesperson for the lead attorneys in the appeal did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
THOUSANDS OF LAWSUITS
Filed by states, municipalities, school districts and individuals, the lawsuits allege that social media companies intentionally addicted young users, contributing to surging depression, anxiety and body-image issues and a broader mental health crisis among American youth in recent years.
Parents, school districts, states and other plaintiffs had argued that the trial court’s ruling was not final and therefore could not be appealed. But they also objected to the companies’ arguments about Section 230, saying it does not cover claims related to how they operate and design their products.
The cases, which have been centralized before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, seek damages, penalties and restitution from the companies. The companies appealed Rogers’ orders in 2023 and 2024 that largely allowed the litigation to move forward.
The companies are facing hundreds of additional lawsuits over similar claims in state court, with approximately 3,300 of them in a consolidated proceeding in California state court.
In the first lawsuit to go to trial in the California litigation, and a closely watched test of how juries might respond to similar claims, a Los Angeles jury in March found Meta and Google negligent for designing social media platforms that harm young people. The jury awarded $6 million to a now‑20‑year‑old woman who says she became addicted to Instagram and YouTube as a child.
And, Meta lost both phases of a landmark lawsuit brought by New Mexico in state court. A jury in March ordered it to pay $375 million after finding it had misled consumers about the safety of its platforms. On Thursday, a judge found Meta had created a public nuisance and ordered it to pay an additional $567 million and implement youth-safety measures.
Both Meta and Google, which have denied the claims in those cases, said they would appeal.
Reporting by Diana Novak Jones in Chicago, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi, Matthew Lewis and David Bario
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Diana reports on product liability, litigation, mass torts and the plaintiffs’ bar. She previously worked at Law360 and the Chicago Sun-Times.