Meta, others fail to exclude expert opinion over Section 230 in state social media litigation
( September 22, 2025, 19:32 GMT | Official Statement) -- MLex Summary: A US state court judge rejected arguments by Meta Platforms, Snap, ByteDance and Google that expert opinions, saying certain social media features contributed to the mental health problems allegedly suffered by young users, should be excluded because they relied upon content under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. "Defendants cannot be allowed to apply an improper but-for test that excludes liability under section 230 if the harm would not have occurred but for the third-party content," the judge wrote. But the judge imposed limitations on the plaintiffs' expert testimony and denied the plaintiffs' motion to exclude the defendants' expert opinions.See attached filings....
Prepare for tomorrow’s regulatory change, today
MLex identifies risk to business wherever it emerges, with specialist reporters across the globe providing exclusive news and deep-dive analysis on the proposals, probes, enforcement actions and rulings that matter to your organization and clients, now and in the longer term.
Know what others in the room don’t, with features including:
- Daily newsletters for Antitrust, M&A, Trade, Data Privacy & Security, Technology, AI and more
- Custom alerts on specific filters including geographies, industries, topics and companies to suit your practice needs
- Predictive analysis from expert journalists across North America, the UK and Europe, Latin America and Asia-Pacific
- Curated case files bringing together news, analysis and source documents in a single timeline
Experience MLex today with a 14-day free trial.