NetChoice Sues New York to Block Social Media Warning Label Law

NetChoice sued New York on Nov. 13 in federal court in Manhattan, asking a judge to strike down a state law that would force platforms to display a state-written Surgeon General warning for at least 10 seconds on 25% of the screen every day — and for 30 seconds on 75% of the screen once a user passes three hours of scrolling.

The complaint, filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, names Attorney General Letitia James, who enforces the statute. Her office declined immediate comment, Reuters reported. The law, Senate Bill 4505 as amended by Senate Bill 8827, was signed by Gov. Kathy Hochul last December and takes effect Jan. 1, 2027.

NetChoice argues the mandate compels companies to carry the state's "preferred message" in violation of the First Amendment.

What does the law actually require?

The statute covers platforms offering "addictive features" — algorithmic feeds, autoplay, infinite scroll. Each day a user first hits such a feature, the platform must show the warning for at least 10 seconds, covering at least 25% of the screen, according to the complaint. After three hours of cumulative daily use, and once every hour after that, the warning expands: at least 30 seconds, at least 75% of the screen.

Users can't click through it. There's no skip button.

The mandated text reads: "The Surgeon General has warned that while social media may have benefits for some young users, excessive use may be associated with significant mental health harms." The wording is modeled on a 2023 advisory from then-Surgeon General Vivek Murthy.

The requirement applies to every user unless a platform has reasonably determined the person is over 17. The attorney general can seek civil penalties of up to $5,000 per violation, plus restitution and disgorgement of profits.

NetChoice says the law would apply at minimum to services run by its members: Meta's Facebook, Instagram and Threads, plus TikTok, YouTube, Reddit, Pinterest, X and Automattic's Tumblr.

Why NetChoice calls it compelled speech

"Unlike a static warning on a product label, these warnings repeatedly interrupt users and block access to protected speech," the group said. It characterized the law as "designed to block, burden, and browbeat social media users."

The complaint asks the court to declare General Business Law sections 1520 through 1526 unconstitutional under the First Amendment and void for vagueness, and to bar James from enforcing them. NetChoice also argues the rule pushes adults toward age verification to escape the warnings.

"States cannot do by 'warning label' what they are unable to do by outright ban," the group said.

Is New York an outlier?

No. The suit is the fourth front in a spreading legal fight.

• A federal judge in Colorado blocked a similar warning requirement in November 2025; Colorado is appealing to the 10th Circuit.
• NetChoice sued California over a comparable law last month.
• The group is also challenging Minnesota's version.
• Separately, Meta, Google and TikTok sued California this month over its ban on personalized feeds and autoplay for users under 16.

What comes next

The New York case lands in a judiciary already sorting through conflicting signals on state power over platform design. The Colorado ruling gives NetChoice a favorable precedent to cite; the pending appeal could narrow or reinforce it before New York's law ever takes effect. With Jan. 1, 2027 as the statutory deadline, the Southern District of New York will likely weigh in on whether mandatory screen-filling warnings survive First Amendment scrutiny before a single user ever sees one.