News-Meta-Section-230-Addiction-Verdict-May-2026
May 6, 2026 — Meta Platforms asked a Los Angeles judge to throw out the landmark social media addiction verdict or order a new trial, arguing that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields it from liability and that the jury's finding was unsupported by evidence.[1]
Background
In March 2026, a Los Angeles County jury found Meta and Google negligent in the design of their platforms and liable for harming a young woman identified as Kaley G.M. The jury awarded $4.2 million against Meta and $1.8 million against Google. The case was the first bellwether trial in a California coordinated proceeding involving thousands of similar lawsuits accusing social media companies of designing addictive platforms that fueled a nationwide mental health crisis among teens. Snap and TikTok settled with the plaintiff before trial.[2]
Meta's Filing
Meta's motion, filed Monday and made public Wednesday, argues that Section 230 protects online platforms from liability over user-generated content. Meta contends that evidence at trial \"repeatedly tied Kaley's mental health challenges to the content she viewed, rather than the design features like autoplay and infinite scroll\" — undermining the plaintiff's design-defect theory.[1]
The filing also asks the court to rule in Meta's favor judgment as a matter of law or, alternatively, to order a new trial.
Google's Position
Google has also asked the court to set aside the verdict or order a new trial and has indicated it plans to appeal.
Significance
The case is being closely watched because lower courts have mostly rejected tech companies' Section 230 defenses in social media design-defect cases. An appeal could reach the Ninth Circuit and potentially the Supreme Court, with \"broad implications for many types of internet companies\" according to legal experts. The bellwether verdict will guide settlement discussions in thousands of similar cases pending in federal and state courts.[1][3]