The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has denied Meta Platforms Inc.’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit alleging that the company designed features on its social media platforms to be addictive to young users. This decision marks a significant development in the ongoing debate over the scope of immunity provided to internet companies under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
The lawsuit, initiated by Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell in 2024, contends that Meta’s design choices on Facebook and Instagram exploit the psychological vulnerabilities of minors, leading to addiction and associated mental health issues. The state argues that these design features, such as infinite scroll and push notifications, are intentionally crafted to maximize user engagement, particularly among teenagers. ([bostonglobe.com](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/12/05/business/meta-lawsuit-teen-safety-massachusetts//?utm_source=openai))
Meta sought dismissal of the case, invoking Section 230, which traditionally shields online platforms from liability for content posted by third parties. However, the court distinguished between liability arising from user-generated content and liability stemming from a platform’s own business practices. The court concluded that Section 230 does not immunize Meta from claims based on its own conduct, such as the design and implementation of platform features that allegedly induce addictive behaviors. ([masslawyersweekly.com](https://masslawyersweekly.com/2024/10/30/consumer-protection-social-media-platform-section-230/?utm_source=openai))
This ruling aligns with a broader trend in the judiciary to scrutinize the applicability of Section 230 in cases where platform design and business practices are implicated. Notably, in March 2026, a Los Angeles jury found Meta and Google liable in a case where a young woman alleged that her addiction to social media platforms caused her mental health struggles. The jury concluded that the companies’ design choices contributed to the plaintiff’s harm, signaling potential legal exposure for tech companies beyond the protections of Section 230. ([bloomberg.com](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-25/meta-google-found-liable-in-social-media-addiction-case?utm_source=openai))
Legal experts suggest that these developments could prompt tech companies to reevaluate their platform designs and content moderation policies. The Massachusetts case, in particular, underscores the importance of distinguishing between third-party content and platform design in determining the applicability of Section 230 immunity. As courts continue to navigate these complex issues, the outcomes of such cases may have far-reaching implications for the tech industry and its regulatory landscape.