USA – FLORIDA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Stuart Davidson and Nicolle Brito, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
The Digital Frontier on Trial: School Districts Versus Social Media Giants The American classroom has become a primary bat - tleground for one of the most consequential shifts in modern products liability law. As of early 2026, more than 1,000 school districts have filed lawsuits against social media platforms including Meta Platforms, Inc. (Facebook and Instagram), Google, LLC and Alpha - bet Inc. (YouTube), Snap Inc. (Snapchat), and Byted - ance Inc. and TikTok Inc. (TikTok). This includes 45 of Florida’s 67 school districts, which have filed their own lawsuits. These co-ordinated actions represent a doctrinal evolution: the movement from traditional claims involving physical defects in tangible goods to allegations of psychological and neurobiological inju - ries from an online product’s embedded algorithmic design “defects.” At issue is a foundational legal question: When does a digital platform cease to be a neutral publisher and become a product manufacturer? From Playground Disruption to Federal MDL For more than a decade, school administrators have documented a steep rise in student anxiety, depres - sion, self-harm, and behavioural disruption. In fact, as of 2017, Miami-Dade and Broward middle school students reported all-time high incidences of suicidal ideation of 17.7% and 24.3%, respectively (Youth Risk Behavior Survey 2017 Results (Middle School), Miami-Dade Cnty. Pub. Schs.; Youth Risk Behavior Survey, Broward Cnty. Pub. Schs). While early expla - nations focused on broad societal forces, the battle now squarely targets the design architecture of social media platforms. In June 2024, the US Surgeon Gen - eral called for a health warning label to be placed on social media platforms based on social media’s asso - ciation “with significant mental health harms for ado - lescents” (Vivek H. Murthy, Surgeon General: Why I’m Calling for a Warning Label on Social Media Platforms, N.Y. Times (June 17, 2024), see New York Times.) And in 2024, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law a statute banning children under the age of 14 from creating social media accounts. The law has since been challenged by tech-industry groups on the grounds that it violates First Amendment rights.
In 2023, the federal Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralised in a San Francisco federal court numerous personal injury, state attorney general civil enforcement, municipality, and school district cases into one multidistrict litigation (MDL), styled In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction / Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation , MDL No. 3047 (N.D. Cal.), before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. The school districts generally allege that social media companies defectively designed and engineered their products to maximise engagement through compul - sive-use mechanisms. The school districts further allege that companies externalised the resulting men - tal health costs onto public schools, forcing diversion of educational funds to crisis intervention, counselling, behavioural monitoring software, police enforcement, and infrastructure repair tied to viral social media chal - lenges. The legal framing echoes the US Supreme Court’s longstanding recognition that products liability focuses exclusively on manufacturer conduct. As the Supreme Court observed in Bates v Dow Agro- sciences LLC , products liability law “require[s] manu - facturers to design reasonably safe products, to use due care in conducting appropriate testing of their products, to market products free of manufacturing defects.” 544 U.S. 431, 444 (2005). See also Air & Liquid Sys . Corp . v DeVries , 586 U.S. 446, 452-53 (2019) (Basic tort-law principles “impose[] ‘a duty to exercise reasonable care’ on those whose conduct presents a risk of harm to others. For the manufacturer of a product, the general duty of care includes a duty to warn when the manufacturer ‘knows or has reason to know’ that its product ‘is or is likely to be danger - ous for the use for which it is supplied’....”) (citations omitted). In the MDL, the school districts ‒ among other plaintiffs ‒ argue that algorithmic amplification systems fall squarely within that tradition. Section 230 and the “Design Versus Speech” Divide One of the central defences the social media compa - nies have lodged has been Section 230 of the Com - munications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. §230 (c)(1), which provides that “[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or
348 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook