The first hearing in a lawsuit covering allegations brought by 29 US states against Meta was held in a district court in Oakland, California. During the hearing before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, attorneys for both sides explained to the jury how the company’s platforms are designed and operated in relation to children and young people.
Meta’s designs under scrutiny in court
California Deputy Attorney General Megan O’Neill delivered the opening statement on behalf of the plaintiff states. She argued that Meta’s business model relies on keeping users on Facebook and Instagram and collecting their data. O’Neill claimed that the platforms were designed to keep children coming back repeatedly and that this approach was particularly effective with children.
O’Neill said the jury would be shown how children are drawn to the apps, as well as how features that keep users on the platforms or encourage them to return operate. She argued that tools intended to limit the time children spend on the apps do not provide real protection, claiming that they serve to improve Meta’s public image and make parents feel better about themselves.
O’Neill described the presence of accounts belonging to young children on Facebook and Instagram as a choice rather than an accident. She said the plaintiff states would ask the jury at the end of the trial to hold Meta responsible.
Company bases defense on work focused on young people
Meta attorney Paul Schmidt argued that the company has a history of sharing information with the public about the potential harms of social media use. Schmidt presented the jury with documents concerning young people’s use of social media.
Schmidt said a survey found that 20% of young people reported that Instagram made them feel bad. He said Meta employees had been working on ways to help young people in this group feel better.
Schmidt asked the jury not to reach a final decision until the case was complete. He said the plaintiff states would have to prove that Meta knew its child-targeting features existed and nevertheless failed to remove them.
Schmidt also said Meta was not legally permitted to retain children’s data in a way that would allow it to develop computer models for identifying users under 13. He noted that the company first required users to enter their age on Facebook and later on Instagram, allowing users below the age limit to be reported.
Judge will decide the case
Over hearings expected to last for weeks, numerous people are expected to testify, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Instagram head Adam Mosseri, current and former Meta employees, and psychology experts.
The jury’s role will be advisory. Judge Rogers will decide whether Meta is liable for any wrongdoing and, if so, what penalties or sanctions should apply.
The case addresses claims concerning the state laws of California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey, along with allegations by the other states based on federal law. The design and addiction allegations brought by the other 25 states under their respective state laws are scheduled to be heard in separate proceedings at a later date.
The outcome of the case could provide guidance on how the claims brought by the other states are resolved and could change how Facebook and Instagram operate. Possible sanctions include fines worth billions of dollars and forcing Meta to change the way it operates its platforms.
According to Meta’s own calculations, the company could face penalties of up to $1.4 trillion if it loses the case. The amount would be close to the company’s market value and would be unprecedented in legal history.
Lawsuit filed in October 2023
A large number of US states, including California, New York and Colorado, filed the lawsuit against Meta in October 2023. The plaintiff states alleged that the company used designs that made children and young people dependent on its platforms to generate more advertising revenue, and misled the public despite knowing about the designs’ harmful effects on mental and physical health.
The case filing alleged that Meta aimed to make young people spend more time on its platforms and developed features that exploited the vulnerabilities of developing adolescent brains. The allegations included recommendation algorithms said to trigger dopamine, like buttons alleged to encourage social comparison, constant notifications, visual filters claimed to harm body image, and an infinite-scroll format that made it difficult to leave the app.
The plaintiff states argued that Meta’s own internal research linked its platforms to serious problems among young people, including depression, anxiety, insomnia and disruption to daily life. The states also alleged that the company rejected these findings and published misleading reports.
The allegations also include a violation by Meta of a law intended to protect children’s online privacy. The states alleged that the company collected the personal data of children under 13 without obtaining parental consent, and sought to have the apps halted and sanctions imposed under state or federal law.
