Social Media Law Limiting Children’s Use of Platforms Struck Down by Federal Judge

As social media addiction lawsuits proliferate across the U.S., an Ohio law designed to protect teens from the platforms has been declared unconstitutional.

An Ohio law requiring teens to get parental consent before using social media apps has been struck down by a federal court as unconstitutional, due to its perceived violation of children’s First Amendment rights.

U.S. District Court Judge Algenon Marbley issued the opinion and order (PDF) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio on April 16, ruling in favor of the plaintiff NetChoice, LLC against defendant Dave Yost, in his official capacity as Ohio Attorney General.

NetChoice is a trade association that advocates for online free speech and enterprise, particularly with regard to internet regulation. The organization’s membership includes social media giants like Google, which owns YouTube, Meta, which operates Facebook and Instagram, as well as X (formerly Twitter).

All of these companies, in addition to others, have been named in a growing number of social media addiction lawsuits in recent years, in which parents allege that the platforms use algorithms intended to maximize user engagement to addict children and teens, resulting in compulsive use, eating disorders, depression, anxiety, suicide and child sexual abuse among America’s younger generations.

In his decision, Judge Marbley indicates that although he commends Ohio’s Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Act for its attempt to protect children from abuse, the state has also gone too far, potentially impeding free speech through language in the Act that is overly broad and vague.

Ohio’s Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Act was scheduled to take effect on January 15, 2024. However, Judge Marbley issued a hold on it, which was later extended.

The law would have required operators of websites targeted at youths to obtain parental consent before allowing a child under 16 to use the platform. In addition, these operators would have had to send written confirmation to parents, providing links for them to review content moderation features.

Similar laws have been struck down or blocked in California, Texas, Utah and elsewhere as a result of NetChoice’s challenges.

Judge Marbley indicated that he found the Ohio Act to exist at the intersection of two separate rights protected by the Constitution, that of children to “a significant measure of” freedom of speech under the First Amendment, as well as the parental right to direct the upbringing of their children without “unnecessary governmental intrusion.”

“This Court finds, however, that the Act as drafted fails to pass constitutional muster and is constitutionally infirm,” Judge Marbley said in his opinion. “And in this constitutional democracy, it cannot be gainsaid that even the government’s most noble entreaties to protect its citizenry must abide in the contours of the U.S. Constitution, in this case the First Amendment.”

Social Media Addiction Lawsuits

Judge Marbley’s ruling comes as more than 1,500 social media lawsuits have been filed against many major platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat, each accusing the companies of designing algorithms to foster excessive engagement and contribute to addictive behavior.

In particular, plaintiffs are arguing that these design strategies have caused significant mental health problems for children and teens, including compulsive use, eating disorders, anxiety, depression, self-harm, suicide and exposure to child sexual exploitation.

As the number of claims have grown significantly over the last several years, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) has ordered that all social media addiction lawsuits be consolidated in the Northern District of California, under U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, for coordinated pretrial proceedings in October 2022.

While the lawsuits have been met with sharp opposition from the platforms operators, who have challenged the legal basis for holding them liable for user behavior and content on their sites, Judge Rogers issued an order last month clearing the majority of social media addiction lawsuits to move forward, allowing general negligence and wrongful death claims to proceed against companies like Meta, TikTok and others.