The Pipe, Not The Posts: Part Deux

In our previous client alert, we addressed how algorithms and platform features that rely on user generated speech might not receive Section 230 protections because those features may not be considered platform user content. In these instances, the platform might not carry user generated water through the pipe, but adds its own to the mixture. At the same time, if it is true that there is less Section 230 protection, these same elements should then imbue the content with First Amendment protections as the expressive content of the platform.

A recent decision calls into question whether Courts will see the trade off in this way. Judge Edward J. Davila’s August 5, 2026 order denying motions for preliminary injunction to block California from enforcing the Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act (SB 976), which restricts social media platforms from providing addictive, algorithm-driven feeds and timed notifications to minors without verifiable parental consent, in Meta