Meta Sues to Block California's Ban on Personalized Feeds and Autoplay for Teens, Pointing to Its Own New Two-Hour Limit

Meta Platforms sued California Attorney General Rob Bonta in federal court on Wednesday, asking a judge to block a new state law that bars social media services from showing users under 16 personalized feeds or automatically playing videos. Meta argues the law lets the state override how Facebook, Instagram and Threads choose and display posts, in violation of the First Amendment.

The 49-page complaint, which The Digital Free Press reviewed, was filed Nov. 4 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California as Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Bonta, No. 3:26-cv-13201. It says California Assembly Bill 1709 is "California's latest attempt to flout that fundamental principle and appoint the State as the editor, curator, and controller of online speech."

What AB 1709 Requires

AB 1709, by Assemblymember Josh Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), passed the Legislature on Aug. 31 without a single no vote, according to the state's vote records, and Gov. Gavin Newsom signed it on Sept. 10. Newsom's office described it as "banning addictive features on social media platforms." According to the complaint, it takes effect Jan. 1, 2027.

As Meta describes it, the law bars covered platforms from giving any user under 16 a feed that recommends or ranks posts based on information tied to that user, from autoplaying audio or video, and from offering any other feature the attorney general later designates by regulation. A platform that cannot meet those rules for a minor must delete the minor's account and associated personal information. Platforms must also verify ages before offering the covered features to anyone. The complaint says the law carries civil penalties of up to $50,000 "per affected minor" for knowing violations and up to $25,000 for negligent ones.

Meta calls the law's term "addictive feed" "pejorative." Because its feeds now personalize content and autoplay media, Meta says, the law "would make it unlawful for Meta to disseminate speech to minors altogether" unless it changes those practices.

Meta's Claims and the Relief It Seeks

The complaint brings five counts, all limited to Facebook, Instagram and Threads. Two say the personalized-feed ban and the autoplay ban violate the First Amendment. Citing the Supreme Court's 2024 ruling in Moody v. NetChoice, Meta argues its choices about which posts to show, and in what order, are protected editorial judgments. The other three say Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act preempts the feed ban, the autoplay ban and the account-deletion requirement.

Meta asks the court to declare those provisions unlawful as applied to its three services, to issue a preliminary and then a permanent injunction barring Bonta from enforcing them against Meta, and to award attorneys' fees.

It is not Meta's first challenge to a California feed law. The complaint notes that its suit against SB 976, a 2024 law restricting personalized feeds for minors without parental consent, is pending before the Ninth Circuit.

The Teen Limits Meta Says Are Coming

The complaint also discloses what Meta says it is rolling out for California teens. It lists a default two-hour daily time limit "cumulative across Facebook and Instagram," a default block on access from midnight to 6 a.m., muted push notifications from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. on school days, and hidden like and reaction counts. Teens cannot change those defaults without a parent's or guardian's permission, the filing says, and Meta "expects these defaults to be in place in the coming months."

Meta argues those tools, along with options for minors to choose a non-personalized feed and turn off autoplay, show that the state's bans are not needed.

Those defaults track terms Bonta announced on Aug. 26, when he and a coalition of 51 attorneys general reached a proposed settlement with Meta worth up to $17 billion, pending court approval. Bonta's office said that deal includes a two-hour default daily limit for users under 18, a midnight-to-6 a.m. block and an option for a non-personalized feed. "Meta has agreed to make massive transformations that will reduce the risk of harm from its platforms," Bonta said at the time. The new complaint does not mention the settlement.

No judge had acted on the case as of Thursday morning, according to the court docket.

Sources: Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Bonta, No. 3:26-cv-13201 (N.D. Cal.), complaint filed Nov. 4, 2026 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.483056/gov.uscourts.cand.483056.1.0.pdf); court docket (https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/75074246/meta-platforms-inc-v-bonta/); AB 1709 status and votes (https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260ab1709); Office of the Governor, Sept. 10, 2026 (https://www.gov.ca.gov/2026/09/10/governor-newsom-signs-the-strongest-child-safety-chatbot-and-social-media-laws-in-the-nation/); California Attorney General, Aug. 26, 2026 (https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-secures-transformative-17-billion-settlement-meta).