TikTok, Meta, and Google told a federal judge Wednesday that California’s new law banning personalized social media feeds for minors violates their First Amendment rights — claiming that algorithmic recommendations count as protected editorial decisions, not regulatory targets.
The tech giants are asking San Jose federal court to block Senate Bill 976, the Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act, before it takes effect. They argue the law unconstitutionally restricts how they curate content for users under 18.
Tech Companies Claim Algorithm Decisions Are Free Speech
Elizabeth Prelogar, YouTube’s attorney and former Biden administration solicitor general, told the court that organizing a 13-year-old’s feed based on viewing history constitutes content moderation — a form of expression protected by the First Amendment. The companies say both human editorial choices and automated algorithms that determine what users see when scrolling represent protected speech.
California’s law would require social media platforms to show minors only chronological feeds by default, blocking the engagement-driven recommendations that have made these platforms billions. Parents could still opt their children into personalized feeds, but companies would lose the automatic targeting that keeps young users scrolling.
Judge Raises Questions About AI in Content Curation
The federal judge presiding over the consolidated cases raised the issue of artificial intelligence’s role in social media feeds during arguments — a question that could determine whether algorithmic recommendations deserve the same constitutional protection as human editorial judgment.
The tech companies maintain no meaningful distinction exists between human content decisions and algorithmic ones. California legislators who passed the law see it differently: they believe addictive, personalized feeds harm children’s mental health and that states have authority to protect minors even when speech is involved.
The court hasn’t indicated when it will rule on the preliminary injunction request. If the judge sides with California, the law could reshape how 40 million Americans — including millions of minors — experience social media. If the companies win, it would mark another victory for the industry’s argument that algorithmic curation deserves constitutional protection from state regulation.
Key Points
- Tech companies say algorithmic content recommendations are protected speech, not regulatable conduct
- California’s law would force platforms to show minors chronological feeds by default unless parents opt in
- A federal judge questioned whether AI-driven recommendations deserve the same First Amendment protection as human editorial choices
https://www.courthousenews.com/tech-companies-ask-to-block-california-law-restricting-personalized-feeds-for-minors/ – June 10, 2026
