TikTok Pushes for Dismissal of Lawsuit From Nebraska

TikTok is seeking the dismissal of Nebraska’s lawsuit alleging harm to children, citing lack of jurisdiction and federal protections.

At a Glance

TikTok argues for lawsuit dismissal on personal jurisdiction grounds.
Nebraska claims TikTok harms children with inappropriate content.
TikTok cites Section 230 protection for user-generated content.
The case is part of broader legal challenges against TikTok by multiple states.
The judge takes the motion to dismiss under advisement.

TikTok Challenges Nebraska’s Lawsuit

TikTok is seeking dismissal of a lawsuit filed by Nebraska, which alleges the popular social media platform is harmful to children. The company argues that it lacks personal jurisdiction in the state and is not liable for content viewed by Nebraskans. This legal battle is part of a broader trend of states taking action against TikTok over concerns about its impact on young users.

Nebraska’s lawsuit, filed by Attorney General Mike Hilgers, accuses TikTok of violating consumer protection laws through “deceptive and unfair trade practices.” The state claims that TikTok harms children by exposing them to inappropriate content, contradicting the app’s safety claims. Hilgers argues that TikTok’s platform is addictive and shows children inappropriate content shortly after signing up.

TikTok Argues for Dismissal of Nebraska’s Suit Alleging the Social Media Platform Harms Children

— The Epoch Times (@EpochTimes) October 25, 2024

TikTok’s Defense Strategy

TikTok’s legal team is mounting a defense against Nebraska’s allegations. The company’s primary argument centers on the issue of personal jurisdiction. TikTok contends that its statements about content moderation were not specifically directed at Nebraska, thus lacking the necessary connection to the state for the lawsuit to proceed.

“The state is challenging statements that TikTok made primarily on static webpages that do not mention Nebraska, that were not made from Nebraska and were not directed at or expressly aimed at Nebraska. And the only connection that the state identifies between those statements and the state is that, allegedly, individuals in the state viewed those statements,” Blaine Evanson of California’s Gibson Dunn said.

Additionally, TikTok is invoking Section 230 of the U.S. Code, which provides internet service providers with protection from liability for user-generated content. This federal law has been a crucial shield for social media platforms in similar legal challenges.

Nebraska’s Counter-Arguments

Nebraska’s legal team is pushing back against TikTok’s motion to dismiss. The state argues that TikTok engages directly with users in Nebraska through contracts and targeted content, establishing a sufficient connection to the state. John Hughes, representing Nebraska, emphasized the platform’s active engagement with users.

“TikTok is expressly, directly, engaging with all of the users in Nebraska, not just by the use of the platform, but because every single user that signs up for TikTok in Nebraska enters into a bilateral contract with TikTok,” Hughes said.

The state maintains that TikTok’s safety assurances are false and that its content moderation is ineffective. Nebraska’s lawsuit seeks civil penalties and injunctive relief under the state’s Consumer Protection Act and Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

Broader Implications

This legal battle is not isolated to Nebraska. More than a dozen bipartisan state attorneys general have sued TikTok on similar grounds, bringing the total to 23 states challenging the platform. The concerns range from data privacy to the app’s alleged contribution to a youth mental health crisis.

“TikTok tells parents its platform is safe for kids, but our investigation reveals that nothing could be further from the truth,” Hilgers said.

The case against TikTok is drawing parallels to past legal actions against Big Tobacco, highlighting the seriousness with which states are approaching the perceived threats to child safety online. As the judge takes the motion to dismiss under advisement, the outcome of this case could have significant implications for how social media platforms operate and are regulated in the United States.