Lawsuits blaming social media platforms for teen suicides, eating disorders and mental collapses have picked up in the months since Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen told Congress that her company knew its products were addictive to kids and that their mental stability was suffering as a result. And a bill moving through the California statehouse would make companies liable for addicting children, drawing comparisons to a strategy used against the tobacco industry.

The nation’s largest federal appeals court last year ruled that the legal shield — known as Section 230 of the U.S. Communications Decency Act — didn’t apply to a Snapchat filter blamed for the car crash deaths of two teenagers. Texas’ Supreme Court let a sex trafficking case against Facebook proceed, citing Congress’ 2018 changes to federal law. And an appellate court recently refused Facebook’s attempt to circumvent that lawsuit. Georgia’s Supreme Court in March likewise ruled that a separate complaint over Snapchat’s speed filter can move forward because the plaintiffs have a good case the app made a risky product.

“I am pretty optimistic that tides are turning and we are going to see a backlash on Section 230 from the courts,” said Carrie Goldman, a New York-based trial attorney who used product liability law to challenge Grindr’s federal shield. Powerful social media companies, she added, “were never supposed to be immune from liability.”