Today, August 24, the preliminary-injunction hearing in Does 1 through 26 v. Meta Platforms, Inc. is scheduled before Judge William H. Orrick in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The court’s July 17 order denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and set the hearing for August 24, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. PDT on Zoom.
The same order said the court may reconsider whether and how AI was used in an improper manner to cause the plaintiffs’ reduction in force. In the order, the plaintiffs allege that Meta used a “constellation of internal artificial-intelligence-assisted systems” to score, rank, and select employees for termination, while Meta declared that selection decisions were made by human business leaders using neutral criteria and that no selection decision was made by AI.
AP reported that 26 Meta employees sued, alleging AI-driven layoff picks hit workers on medical and parental leave. AP also reported Meta’s statement that the claims “lack merit” and that workforce management decisions were made by people, not AI. The supplied sources do not identify any hearing outcome today.
What the court has already said
The July 17 order denied the temporary restraining order request. It also set the August 24 preliminary-injunction hearing and said the court may reconsider whether and how AI was used in an improper manner to cause the plaintiffs’ reduction in force.
The supplied sources do not identify any additional ruling beyond that order, and they do not identify the result of today’s hearing.
What the parties allege
According to the court order, the plaintiffs say Meta used internal AI-assisted systems to score, rank, and select employees for termination. The same order records Meta’s declaration that human business leaders used neutral criteria and that no selection decision was made by AI.
AP’s reporting adds that the 26 employees who sued allege AI-driven layoff picks affected workers on medical and parental leave. AP also reports Meta’s statement that the claims “lack merit” and that people, not AI, made the decisions.
Why this case matters
The supplied research frames this as a live test of whether AI-assisted workforce-management tools can be challenged as part of discriminatory layoff selection, not just hiring. The immediate issue in the sources is layoff selection; they do not provide a broader measurement of labor-market effects.
If the plaintiffs gain traction, the research says the case could push companies to document how AI-related metrics factor into termination decisions and how they account for protected leave, disability, and other exceptions. The supplied sources do not state whether that outcome will occur.
What to watch next
Watch for any court discussion of the plaintiffs’ allegation that internal AI-assisted systems were used in the selection process and Meta’s position that human leaders made the decisions using neutral criteria. The supplied sources do not identify any timetable beyond today’s hearing or any next filing date.
They also do not identify whether the court will grant, deny, or otherwise resolve any further request for emergency or preliminary relief today.