I examine Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Bonta, in which a federal judge declined to block enforcement of California’s social media addiction law against Meta, TikTok, and Google. The piece explores whether algorithmically personalized feeds qualify as “expressive” speech deserving First Amendment protection, tracing how the court distinguished this case from the Supreme Court’s Moody v. NetChoice precedent. The article lays out the arguments on both sides of this unresolved and increasingly urgent question as courts and legislatures grapple with the boundaries of speech in the age of AI.
