Google, Meta and TikTok are asking federal courts to block a California social media law restricting features for children under 16, arguing that it violates the First Amendment and conflicts with federal protections for online platforms. Their separate complaints were filed on November 4, 2026, ahead of the law’s scheduled January 1, 2027 start.
The lawsuits challenge Assembly Bill 1709 and name California Attorney General Rob Bonta as the defendant. Google sued in San Jose, Meta in San Francisco and TikTok in Los Angeles.
Bonta’s office said on November 5 that it was reviewing the filings and remained committed to defending California’s laws protecting children online.
Restrictions on feeds and autoplay
Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 1709 on September 10, 2026. The statute prohibits covered platforms from providing users under 16 with features it defines as addictive, including personalized feeds and autoplay. It also requires companies to take “reasonable measures” to keep those features from younger users and to verify age before providing them.
The law allows children under 16 to maintain accounts if they are not given any prohibited features. Those accounts are exempt from its account-deletion requirement, leaving platforms a route to continue serving younger users with a different experience.
California lawmakers framed the restrictions as safeguards against platform designs that encourage compulsive use. The companies argue that the same features help them organize content and provide experiences appropriate for younger audiences.
Companies argue the rules restrict protected speech
The complaints contend that decisions about recommending and displaying users’ posts are protected editorial choices. They also argue that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act preempts the challenged restrictions. That provision generally protects online services from being treated as the publisher or speaker of content supplied by others.
TikTok called the law “a blatantly unconstitutional restriction on free expression that erodes the long-standing and protected practice of curating content based on user preferences, which bookstores, TV networks and streaming services all use.”
The company said it had introduced numerous safeguards for young users and argued that the law would limit parents’ ability to decide what is appropriate for their children.
Meta said the law violates the First Amendment “by letting the government dictate how ideas are organised, displayed, or shared with Californians”.
“Under the law, we would be forced to either remove features that keep teens’ experiences age-appropriate, or cut thousands of California teens off from family, friends, and their communities,” Meta said.
Google said parents were best placed to make decisions for their families and pointed to its parental controls and protections.
“Overly broad laws like this actually break the systems we’ve built to help kids find high-quality, age-appropriate videos,” Google spokesman José Castañeda said.
Earlier settlements over child safety
The challenges follow other legal disputes over allegations that social media companies designed features to encourage compulsive use among children.
In August 2026, state attorneys general announced a proposed settlement with Meta that included payments of up to $17.1 billion and changes to Facebook and Instagram. The announcement specified that the agreement was subject to court approval. Its terms included stronger age checks, parental controls and restrictions on minors’ time on the platforms.
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall announced a settlement with TikTok on September 25, 2026. His office said the agreement resolved the state’s allegations concerning addictive features, harm to young users and misleading safety claims, and required additional child-safety measures.
