Google, Meta, and TikTok are going to court in a bid to stop parts of a new California law from being enforced against them – but not to have it repealed.
The law, AB 1709, is set to take effect on January 1, 2027, and the three tech companies are each asking for temporary and permanent injunctions to stop the state attorney general, Rob Bonta, from enforcing some of its provisions against them.
Each of the three lawsuits filed on November 4 deals only with one company and its products: Meta is fighting for Facebook, Instagram, and Threads; Google for YouTube; and TikTok for TikTok Inc. and TikTok USDS Joint Venture LLC.
That means that even if these three giants manage to get exemptions from the law, every other platform will still have to comply with all of its requirements.
None of the lawsuits target the part of the law that requires age verification for all users, in order to ensure nobody under 16 is using “addictive features” such as personalized feeds and autoplay.
As TikTok’s filing puts it, “The Act therefore conditions every Californian’s access to TikTok’s personalized feed on age verification.”
The three companies are, however, challenging different aspects of AB 1709, and citing different reasons, including the First Amendment and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
They seem to agree that the state is overstepping its bounds by trying to control online speech and content curation.
Meta’s complaint calls the law “California’s latest attempt to flout that fundamental principle and appoint the State as the editor, curator, and controller of online speech.”
Meta is challenging the ban on feeds and autoplay, as well as the provision that gives platforms a choice to either remove these features for under-16s or delete their accounts. The company is also contesting the part of the law that defines which services are covered by the new rules.
As for the age verification requirement, while the law mentions that a platform must “verify the age of a user pursuant to the Digital Age Assurance Act,” none of the three companies are challenging this rule.
In fact, Meta’s filing says the company is “rolling out several additional default protections for California teens, including more robust age-verification processes.”
TikTok does take issue with the fallback method of determining age, in case a platform is “unable to verify the age of the user,” in which case it must use the age determination under SB 976. TikTok calls this “unconstitutionally vague” because the law doesn’t explain what “unable to verify” means.
The draft rules prepared by the attorney general’s office explain that SB 976 will allow the use of “biological or behavioral signals, such as facial analysis, hand-gesture or gait patterns, and vocal analysis” to determine age. Other accepted methods include a cryptographic proof and government ID.
The draft states that an operator “must not use as its sole method of age assurance a method that requires a user to provide government-issued identification.” And, as we reported when AB 1709 was signed, adults who want to use personalized feeds and autoplay must also verify their age.
Google’s complaint says that the law “wrests control of what kids watch from their parents and gives it to the State” and bans personalized recommendations and autoplay “even if their parents consent.” Google is also challenging the rule to remove or delete accounts of under-16s who are using these features, as well as the duty to “implement reasonable measures to ensure that users under 16 years of age are not provided” the two features.
TikTok, meanwhile, is asking the court to block the bans, as well as the rule that makes companies liable “without regard to whether the speaker knew the facts that made the speech unlawful.”
The company also contests several terms used in the law as “unconstitutionally vague,” including “reasonable measures” and “autoplay.”
As for penalties, the law provides for fines of up to $50,000 per affected minor for knowing violations, and $25,000 for negligent ones.
In Reclaim The Net’s tracker of age verification laws and initiatives around the world, we noted that the way AB 1709 is designed means that “a platform cannot identify the under-16s without sorting everyone else too.” And, “every adult must be checked so the state can restrict every teenager.”
Meta, Google, and TikTok are right that the state should not be allowed to edit and control online feeds and speech – but they are fighting only to make sure their products are exempt from this rule, and not to dismantle the scheme that will be used to enforce it, including the age verification checkpoint that will apply to every Californian.
So if they win their cases, the big picture will be that Facebook, YouTube, and TikTok will be able to keep their allegedly addictive features – but every user in California will still have to prove their age to use these platforms, and every smaller platform will have to comply with all provisions of AB 1709.
