Iowa is fighting to keep its consumer fraud lawsuit against TikTok alive after the platform moved Friday to dismiss the case, arguing that federal law and the First Amendment shield it from liability over lewd content accessible to users as young as 12.

The case is being heard in Polk County District Court before Judge David Ranscht, who said he would take the matter under advisement and issue a ruling within weeks.

What Iowa Alleges

The state’s lawsuit claims that user-created videos on TikTok — available to children as young as 12 — contain sexual content, nudity, profanity, and mature themes including references to alcohol, tobacco, and drugs, despite TikTok’s representations that such content is “mild” or “infrequent.”

Iowa’s amended complaint added two significant new claims: that TikTok’s platform is deliberately engineered to be addictive to young users, and that the Chinese government may be accessing personal information of American TikTok users.

The state is pursuing 11 separate claims against the platform under Iowa’s consumer fraud statutes.

TikTok’s Section 230 Defense

TikTok’s central defense rests on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act — the federal statute that has long shielded internet platforms from liability for content posted by third parties.

Anders Linderot of Covington & Burling, arguing for TikTok, told the judge that design features such as infinite scroll and personalized content algorithms are inseparable from the content itself. “That is a core publishing function,” Linderot argued, meaning state claims based on those features are barred by Section 230.

TikTok also argued its editorial decisions about how to select and present content are protected by the First Amendment, making Iowa’s claims unconstitutional.

Iowa Pushes Back

Iowa’s attorney John Ohlendorf of Cooper & Kirk rejected both arguments. On Section 230, he argued the federal statute protects platforms from liability for publishing third-party content — but does not protect TikTok from liability for its own misrepresentations about that content.

On the First Amendment argument, Ohlendorf told the judge that “the First Amendment doesn’t protect nonexpressive conduct” — in this case, design features specifically engineered to make the platform more addictive to minors. “At the very least, TikTok has substantially contributed to the addictive nature of its content, which makes the platform unlawful,” he argued.

The China Data Question

Judge Ranscht pressed both sides on Iowa’s claims about Chinese government access to user data, asking whether the state’s concern is the actual risk of data being obtained by China — or TikTok’s alleged misrepresentations about that risk.

“What we care about is that TikTok is honest about that risk,” Ohlendorf said.

TikTok countered that the Chinese data access claims are preempted by federal law under the supremacy clause of the US Constitution, arguing that national security is “an exclusive province of the federal government.” The company pointed to a September 2025 executive order by President Donald Trump acknowledging a new US-based joint venture structure for TikTok’s American operations, which TikTok says resolved national security concerns.

Why This Case Matters for Personal Injury Law

The Iowa lawsuit is part of a nationwide wave of state-level legal actions targeting social media platforms over harm to minors. Similar suits have been filed by attorneys general in California, New York, Florida, and dozens of other states.

The outcome of TikTok’s Section 230 motion could have significant implications for all of those cases. If Judge Ranscht rules that Section 230 does not bar Iowa’s claims about addictive design features, it would open a legal pathway for states to hold platforms liable not just for third-party content — but for the algorithms and design choices that amplify that content.

For families of minors harmed by social media addiction, eating disorders, or mental health crises linked to TikTok use, the ruling could determine whether state consumer fraud laws provide a viable avenue for recovery.

What Happens Next

Judge Ranscht said he will issue a written ruling within weeks. If he denies TikTok’s motion to dismiss on the Section 230 and First Amendment grounds, all 11 of Iowa’s claims will proceed to trial.

InjuryWatch News will continue to track this case as it develops.