OAKLAND: Meta Platforms has strongly rejected accusations that it intentionally designed Facebook and Instagram to become addictive for children, as a major legal battle brought by US states began in federal court in California.
The case could have significant consequences for how some of the world’s most widely used social media platforms operate. A bipartisan group of 29 US states is seeking potentially massive financial penalties as well as changes to Meta’s business practices.
Four states — California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey — are leading the case and allege that Meta designed its platforms to attract and retain young users while downplaying potential risks to their mental health.
The states also accuse Meta of improperly collecting and using the personal information of children.
States Accuse Meta of Targeting Children
Opening statements began Tuesday before an eight-person jury at the federal court in Oakland, California.
Megan O’Neill, a deputy attorney general for California, argued that Meta’s business model depended on keeping users engaged for as long as possible, collecting their data and failing to adequately disclose the potential risks.
She alleged that the strategy was particularly effective among children and teenagers.
According to the states, Meta’s platforms have contributed to problems including anxiety, depression and suicide, while the company allegedly knew about concerns involving young users.
The states are seeking not only financial penalties but also changes to the way Facebook and Instagram operate.
Meta Says Research Does Not Prove the Claims
Meta lawyer Paul Schmidt acknowledged that some social media users experience difficulties but rejected the suggestion that the company’s platforms were deliberately designed to harm young people.
He argued that research does not establish a clear causal link between adolescents’ social media use and a lack of well-being.
Schmidt also told jurors that Meta and its leadership have an interest in improving the services because the company depends on users enjoying its products.
The defence is expected to challenge the states’ interpretation of internal company communications and research throughout the six-week trial.
Judge Could Order Major Changes
The jury is expected to issue an advisory verdict, while US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will ultimately decide whether Meta is legally liable.
If the judge finds against the company, she could impose civil penalties and require changes to Facebook and Instagram.
The potential financial consequences are enormous.
Meta has previously said that penalties could reach as high as $1.4 trillion, an amount close to the company’s market value. Attorneys general involved in the case have estimated that the figure could instead be around $200 billion, which they say would be equivalent to roughly three years of Meta’s after-tax profits.
The states are also seeking structural changes to the platforms.
States Seek Restrictions on Younger Users
California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey want Meta to introduce several changes, including removing features such as likes and infinite scrolling, which they argue encourage users to spend more time on the platforms.
They have also proposed time limits for younger users and stronger enforcement of restrictions intended to prevent children under 13 from accessing the services.
The measures could significantly change the way young people interact with Facebook and Instagram if the court ultimately orders Meta to implement them.
Meta AI Model Breaches Another Company’s Systems During Cybersecurity Test
Former Meta Engineer Testifies
Former Meta safety engineer Arturo Bejar became the first witness called by the states after opening arguments.
Bejar has previously argued that Meta knew some of its child-safety measures were ineffective. He has also testified against the company in several other trials.
Meta had attempted to prevent Bejar from testifying, citing concerns over deleted Signal messages with former employees. Judge Rogers rejected the company’s request.
During his testimony, Bejar told jurors that safety considerations were not always adequately incorporated when new products were introduced.
He specifically referred to Reels, Meta’s short-form video feature, and alleged that safety was not a central consideration when some products were initially launched.
Meta co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram chief Adam Mosseri are also expected to testify during the proceedings.
Critics Gather Outside Courthouse
The case has attracted strong criticism from parents and other advocates concerned about the impact of social media on children.
Outside the courthouse, some critics shared personal experiences involving young people and social media.
Among them was Mary Rodee, whose 15-year-old son, Riley Basford, died by suicide in 2021 after she said he was victimised by a predator on Facebook.
The lawsuit was originally filed in 2023, following years of growing scrutiny over the safety of social media platforms.
The controversy intensified after former Meta employee and whistleblower Frances Haugen testified before the US Senate in 2021, alleging that Meta knew its products could pose risks to children and had information that could help address those risks.
Wider Legal Pressure on Social Media Companies
Meta is not the only technology company facing lawsuits over alleged harm to young users.
Other major platforms, including Snap, TikTok parent ByteDance and YouTube parent Alphabet, are facing thousands of cases brought by states, municipalities, school districts and individuals.
Recent legal decisions have also increased pressure on technology companies.
In March, a Los Angeles jury ordered Meta and Google to pay $6 million to a 20-year-old woman who said she became addicted to Instagram and YouTube after using the platforms as a child.
Earlier this month, a New Mexico judge ordered Meta to pay $567 million in a case involving allegations concerning teenagers’ mental health.
Meanwhile, Tennessee’s attorney general is pursuing a separate case against Meta over similar allegations involving Instagram.
The California trial is therefore being closely watched as a potentially important test of how US courts address the responsibilities of social media companies toward children and teenagers.
