Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Six4Three, LLC v. Facebook, Inc., et al.
Paid petition · Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, No. A166007, A167416 · judgment March 12, 2025
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
This case arises from a social media platform’s use of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to immunize itself from claims arising from the platform’s own actions, and from harms caused by the platform’s own product design choices and related speech. In 2007, Facebook created a platform for thirdparty developers, including a set of application programming interfaces (APIs) allowing developers to access platform-generated content such as friends lists and “friends of friends” lists created by Facebook. By 2012, Facebook had turned its developer platform into a fraudulent scheme, telling developers to build their apps around Facebook’s APIs while secretly planning to privatize them for chosen developers in exchange for ad purchases, data deals, and competitive concessions. In 2015, Petitioner Six4Three, a developer whose business was destroyed by Facebook’s API scheme, sued in California state court. The courts below— faced with splits across and within federal judicial circuits and a grab bag of contradictory case law from California appellate courts—held that Facebook’s own speech and product design decisions were immunized from liability under Section 230. The question presented is: Whether Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act immunizes an online platform for its own conduct, speech, and product design choices?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Yavar Bathaee
Bathaee Dunne LLP
For respondent
Ari Benjamin Asher Holtzblatt
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Nov 10 2025Petition DENIED.
- Oct 22 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/7/2025.
- Oct 13 2025Waiver of right of respondent Facebook, Inc., et al. to respond filed.
- Sep 09 2025Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 14, 2025)