Ninth Circuit Dismisses Meta’s Early Appeal as Youth-Safety Trial Begins

The Ninth Circuit dismissed Meta’s early appeal over Section 230 on August 10, leaving a four-state trial on course. The ruling matters because Meta must defend the states’ disputed youth-safety and children’s-data claims before obtaining appellate review of that defense.

Why the appeal was dismissed

An interlocutory appeal asks an appeals court to review a ruling before the trial court enters a final judgment. Meta and TikTok sought that immediate review after the trial court declined to end claims under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

The appellate panel described Section 230 as a defense against liability rather than immunity from being sued. It therefore concluded that the challenged rulings did not qualify for immediate review under the collateral-order doctrine.

The panel dismissed Meta’s and TikTok’s appeals for lack of jurisdiction. It also dismissed conditional cross-appeals filed by several plaintiff groups.

The court did not eliminate the companies’ Section 230 arguments. Its opinion says those defenses may be reviewed after the trial court enters a final judgment.

Meta had also asked the Ninth Circuit to pause the approaching trial. The panel denied that emergency stay request as moot after dismissing the appeal.

What the states allege

The trial concerns Facebook and Instagram features that the states allege were designed or deployed in ways that harmed young users. The states also allege that Meta misled the public about safety and collected personal information from children under 13 without required parental consent.

Those assertions remain allegations. The Ninth Circuit did not decide whether Meta harmed children, made deceptive statements or violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act.

A separate June 29 summary-judgment order also left disputed facts for trial.

Meta disputes liability

Meta has contested the claims through dismissal motions, a summary-judgment motion, the appeal and an emergency stay request. The district-court docket also shows Meta continued filing trial materials while the appeal was pending.

In a statement published by the Associated Press, Meta said it strongly disagreed with the allegations. The company said it had worked with parents, experts and law enforcement while developing features intended to support young people.

Meta’s position will be tested against the states’ evidence at trial. The appellate ruling addressed only whether the Section 230 dispute could be reviewed before final judgment.

The first trial covers four states

The broader federal litigation includes claims from more states, but the first Meta trial covers California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey. The Associated Press reported that jury selection began in Oakland on August 12.

The official docket identifies the case as People of the State of California v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No. 4:23-cv-05448-YGR. Chief U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers is presiding.

The docket showed active filings through August 12, including an updated Meta exhibit list. That activity confirms the parties were continuing trial preparation after the appeal was dismissed.

What happens next

The trial court will hear evidence on the states’ remaining claims and Meta’s defenses. The states seek monetary relief and court-ordered changes, but no remedy has been awarded in this case.

A trial decision would not necessarily end the litigation. Meta and other parties may seek appellate review after a final judgment, including review of preserved Section 230 issues.

Sources

• Ninth Circuit consolidated opinion dismissing the appeals
• Northern District of California case page and recent filings
• June 29 district-court summary-judgment order
• Associated Press report on jury selection and the parties’ positions
• California Department of Justice statement on the appellate decision