Additionally, the Act requires social media platform operators to enable by default a setting that restricts minor users from seeing the number of “likes,” shares or other feedback that a minor’s social media post has garnered. The Constitutional ChallengeNetChoice, a trade association representing major technology and e-commerce companies, including social media platforms, sued California to block the Act before it took effect. The district court granted in part and denied in part NetChoice's motion for a preliminary injunction. The interlocutory rulings indicate that state laws restricting personalized social media feeds for minors and similar protective measures may withstand First Amendment challenges. The Ninth Circuit noted the district court’s conclusion that “addictive feeds” are not necessarily a form of social media platforms’ speech, meaning that restricting “addictive feeds” does not restrict access to the platforms' speech.