Home / News
Meta Faces Landmark Trial Over Alleged Addiction of Young Users
• Attorneys general from four states allege Meta knowingly designed addictive features that harm youth mental health and collected data from under-13 users.
• Meta's defense cites internal studies and the deletion of 1.4 million underage accounts as evidence of its responsible platform stewardship.
• The trial's outcome could result in penalties reaching $1.4 trillion and force Meta to alter core platform features like infinite scrolling.
• This case is a bellwether for a larger multistate lawsuit and follows other major legal losses for Meta over user harm claims.
A high-stakes legal battle commenced Tuesday in a California federal court, placing Meta Platforms Inc. under intense scrutiny for its business practices concerning young users. Attorneys general from California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey presented their case before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, accusing the social media titan of deliberately engineering its products to foster addiction among children and adolescents. This trial serves as a critical test case for a broader coalition of more than 40 states, with profound implications for the company's operational future and the broader technology industry.
In opening arguments, state prosecutors painted a damning portrait of corporate conduct. California Deputy Attorney General Megan O’Neill asserted that Meta employs features like infinite scroll to keep young users compulsively engaged, despite internal research acknowledging the negative mental health impacts. She further alleged the company systematically harvested data from children under the age of 13 without parental consent. “Meta hid its own research showing how often kids have bad, even traumatic, experiences on the apps,” O’Neill stated, arguing the company concealed the true dangers of Instagram and Facebook.
Meta’s legal team, led by attorney Paul Schmidt, vigorously contested the allegations. Schmidt pointed to the company’s own research initiatives, including a study finding 20% of teens reported feeling worse after using Instagram, as evidence of its commitment to understanding and improving user well-being. He characterized the figure not as an admission of guilt, but as a diagnostic tool. Schmidt also defended Meta's age enforcement, noting it had deleted 1.4 million under-13 accounts over four years and that CEO Mark Zuckerberg has advocated for app stores to implement age verification.
The financial and operational stakes are monumental. Meta has stated a loss could theoretically trigger penalties as high as $1.4 trillion—a figure disputed by the states—and could mandate significant platform changes, such as removing addictive features for younger demographics. This trial adds to a growing wave of litigation; just this month, Meta was ordered to pay $567 million in a New Mexico teen mental health case, and in March, a jury found Meta and YouTube negligent in a separate addiction lawsuit, awarding $6 million in damages. As this bellwether proceeding unfolds, it signals an escalating legal reckoning for social media giants over their societal impact.