Meta, Google, and TikTok Sue California Over Teen Social Media Law

“AB 1709 is a blatantly unconstitutional restriction on free expression that erodes the long-standing and protected practice of curating content based on user preferences, which book stores, TV networks and streaming services all use,” a TikTok spokesperson said in an emailed statement.

That stark condemnation sits at the heart of a multi-front legal showdown in California. Meta, Google, and TikTok have filed lawsuits against California Attorney General Rob Bonta to block a new state law designed to restrict social media features deemed addictive for users under 16.

Lawsuits Target AB 1709 Restrictions on Young Users

California Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 1709 into law in September, with an effective date slated for the start of the new year. The legislation targets fundamental mechanics of modern platform architecture. It prohibits social networks from offering autoplay videos and personalized feeds to users under 16. The measure mandates that platforms delete those users' accounts if they don’t turn those features off.

The stakes for noncompliance are steep. Platforms that fail to comply could be liable for fines of up to $50,000 per affected user under 16 years old. Major tech companies argue the statute crosses constitutional lines. Meta asserted in its legal filing that AB 1709 violates the First Amendment by overriding its editorial decisions about how to display content.

“Meta currently organizes its feeds of content to include personalized content recommendations and to automatically play media, [so] the Act would make it unlawful for Meta to disseminate speech to minors altogether, and would require Meta to delete minors’ accounts, unless it changes these practices,” Meta wrote in its lawsuit, adding that Section 230 preempts the state law. Google and TikTok raised similar arguments.

Global Precedents and Privacy Concerns Frame the Debate

The California measure mirrors worldwide regulatory efforts aiming to restrict adolescents’ platform engagement with the goal of enhancing psychological well-being among youth. Australia became the first country to ban social media for users under 16 altogether in December 2025. A comparable measure was enacted by France, though its highest court subsequently invalidated it due to apprehensions regarding freedom of speech infringements.

Nevertheless, cybersecurity and privacy specialists caution that mandatory age verification mechanisms, which necessitate gathering additional user information, can unintentionally compromise confidentiality for all platform participants, adults included.

“AB 1709 compels platforms to collect even more information from every user, invading everyone’s privacy and frustrating our ability to remain anonymous online,” said EFF Associate Director of State Affairs Rindala Alajaji in a press briefing. “Online surveillance by social media companies is harmful, and yet this bill requires even more of it, further concentrating power in the hands of tech companies rather than actually protecting users.”

Alajaji also pointed to the role of digital platforms in youth-led social movements, such as the Parkland shooting survivors’ March for Our Lives and climate activist Greta Thunberg’s global reach. As a functional ban on social media for youth under 16, Alajaji said the law cuts young people off from essential information and experiences, silencing the very voices it claims to protect.

Tech Companies Defend Existing Family Controls Against Broad Legislative Bans

Tech companies maintain that broad legislative bans undermine existing family management tools. Representatives for Google pointed out that YouTube disables autoplay by default for younger accounts, alongside giving parents the option to completely block access to Shorts for their teenagers.

“We believe parents are best positioned to make the right decisions for their families, which is why we offer a range of protections and tools that put parents in control,” a Google spokesperson said. “Overly broad laws like this actually break the systems we’ve built to help kids find high-quality, age-appropriate videos.”

As this legal challenge moves forward, Meta encounters additional major legal hurdles, highlighted by a pending settlement agreement reaching up to $18 billion to settle child protection allegations initiated by 29 U.S. states. Meanwhile, a representative for Attorney General Bonta stated that his office is reviewing the filings and is committed to “defending California’s commonsense laws to protect kids online.”

More on California: California SB 947: New Restrictions on Automated Decision Systems in Employment · California 2026 Election: Governor Projected Winner, Mayor Undecided · California vote counting is slow due to voter access and security