Nevada’s ongoing legal battle with some of the world’s most influential social media companies took a dramatic turn this month, as the state’s Supreme Court handed Attorney General Aaron Ford a major victory—ensuring his lawsuit against TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook, and Messenger will proceed in state court. The case, which has captured national attention, centers on allegations that these platforms are not just addictive by design, but actively harmful to the mental and physical health of young users across Nevada.
The legal saga began in January 2024, when Ford filed suit against the parent companies of these social media giants. The complaint, as reported by the California Globe and Las Vegas Review-Journal, accuses the platforms of creating features specifically engineered to foster compulsive use among children and teenagers. The list of alleged harms is long: from mental health struggles and body image issues to privacy invasions and even links to auto accidents, drug overdoses, suicides, eating disorders, and sexual exploitation.
At the heart of the lawsuit is the claim that these companies have deployed an arsenal of psychological hooks—endless scrolling, dopamine-inducing rewards, disappearing content, likes, shares, and push notifications—all with the aim of maximizing youth engagement and, ultimately, profit. As Ford’s office put it, these features are designed to "exploit children’s developing minds—all for massive financial gain."
Ford’s commitment to the issue has been unwavering. "My commitment to protecting consumers, particularly those that are as vulnerable as our youth, is unwavering," he stated when the suit was first filed, as cited by the California Globe. "Bringing this litigation is an important step toward ensuring social media platforms put our children’s safety before their profits. I look forward to working closely with our partners to protect the youth of our state."
The legal journey, however, hasn’t been a smooth one. TikTok and its parent company, ByteDance, mounted a robust defense, arguing that the lawsuit should be thrown out on the grounds of the First Amendment and Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act (CDA)—a law that has long shielded online platforms from liability for user-generated content. But the Nevada Supreme Court, in a decision handed down on November 7, 2025, rejected these arguments, clearing the way for the case to be heard in Clark County District Court.
Central to the court’s ruling was the question of jurisdiction. Could Nevada’s courts really hold TikTok accountable for actions that, at least in theory, could be happening anywhere in the world? The justices answered with a resounding yes, pointing to TikTok’s targeted marketing in Reno and Las Vegas, as well as outreach efforts to a local elementary school PTA. "While operating a website accessible in many states in and of itself does not constitute express aiming, TikTok’s interactive social media business model depends on capturing users’ attention in order to collect demographic and behavioral data that it then sells to third-party advertisers," the court wrote. The evidence, they concluded, showed that TikTok "knew of and pursued its market success in Nevada and that young users have struggled with limiting their TikTok use due to the at-issue design features."
Perhaps even more significant was the court’s stance on Section 230. While the law protects platforms from liability for content posted by third parties, the Nevada Supreme Court found that it does not offer blanket immunity for the design of the platform itself—especially when that design is alleged to be inherently harmful. Drawing on precedent from a lawsuit against Snapchat (where the app’s Speed Filter was linked to a fatal car crash), the court noted: "On its face, the State’s complaint does not seek to hold TikTok liable for any third-party content that it publishes. The state’s first (Nevada Deceptive Trade Practices Act) claim… targets TikTok’s alleged own knowingly false statements and omissions to regulators and the public about young users’ safety on the platform."
The implications of this ruling extend far beyond Nevada. As reported by both the Las Vegas Review-Journal and California Globe, Ford’s office has also filed similar allegations against Kik, another popular social media platform, and joined 36 other attorneys general in a letter to Instagram raising concerns about user privacy. The Nevada case could set a precedent for how states across the country pursue claims against tech giants accused of putting children at risk.
The lawsuit is being handled by a team of outside lawyers from Nachawati Law Group, WH Law, and Kemp Jones, working on an escalating contingency-fee contract. This means that the firms only get paid if Nevada wins or reaches a settlement—a structure that underscores the high stakes and the confidence Ford’s office has in its case.
For its part, TikTok has remained steadfast in its defense, maintaining that its platform is protected by the First Amendment and that it complies with federal laws. But the courts, at least for now, have disagreed. "TikTok has failed in its effort to evade justice in Nevada’s courts. Again. As this case continues, I am confident my office will prevail," Ford said following the Supreme Court decision, as quoted by California Globe. "We will never stop working to hold social media companies accountable for the harm they have done to Nevada’s youth."
The broader context of this legal battle is the growing scrutiny of social media’s impact on young people. According to the complaint, all five platforms named in the suit are enormously popular with teens, and each allegedly has a large percentage of users under the age of 13—the legal cutoff for these types of apps. The platforms’ addictive features, the state argues, are not accidental but the result of deliberate design choices meant to drive engagement and, by extension, advertising revenue.
While the case now moves forward in Clark County District Court, its outcome could reshape how social media companies operate—not just in Nevada, but nationwide. If Ford’s team is successful, it could force tech giants to rethink the very features that have made them so popular—and so profitable—among young users.
For Nevada families, the stakes are personal. The allegations touch on some of the most pressing concerns of our digital age: the safety of children online, the responsibility of tech companies to their youngest users, and the power of state governments to hold those companies to account. As the legal process unfolds, all eyes will be on Nevada’s courts—and on the future of social media itself.
The coming months promise to be pivotal, not just for Ford and the companies in his crosshairs, but for the millions of young people whose lives are shaped, for better or worse, by the apps they use every day.
