Meta Platforms is facing one of the most consequential legal challenges in its history as attorneys general from 29 U.S. states take the company to federal court over allegations that it deliberately designed Facebook and Instagram to keep children and teenagers engaged, while misleading the public about the safety of its platforms.
Jury selection began Wednesday in an Oakland, California, federal court, marking the opening phase of a trial that is expected to last around seven weeks. Opening statements are scheduled for August 18, with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri expected to testify during the proceedings.
The case is being closely watched because of the potential scale of the damages and the sweeping changes the states are seeking. Meta has warned that potential damages could reach $1.4 trillion, a figure approaching the company’s reported market value of roughly $1.5 trillion. The attorneys general have not publicly disclosed the amount they ultimately intend to seek.
Beyond financial penalties, the states want the court to order fundamental changes to the way Meta operates its platforms, including stronger age restrictions, changes to recommendation systems, limits on features such as infinite scrolling and restrictions on the use of children’s data.
The trial comes at a critical moment for the technology industry, as Meta and other major social media companies face thousands of lawsuits alleging that their products contribute to harmful or compulsive use among young people.
Table of Contents
Why the Meta Trial Is So Significant
The Oakland proceedings are being described as a major test of the legal theory that social media companies can be held responsible for the way they design their products, rather than simply for content posted by users.
The 29-state case focuses on two broad areas of allegations. The first concerns the design of Facebook and Instagram and whether Meta intentionally developed features that encouraged children and teenagers to remain on its platforms for extended periods.
The second concerns children’s privacy. The states allege that Meta illegally collected and used children’s data in violation of federal law, including protections governing the online privacy of minors.
The legal challenge therefore extends beyond the question of whether social media can be harmful. It asks whether platform design decisions, data practices and representations about child safety can expose a technology company to substantial legal liability.
The outcome could potentially influence the large number of similar lawsuits pending against Meta and other technology companies.
29 States Join the Legal Challenge
The broader lawsuit was filed in 2023 following a multistate investigation into Facebook and Instagram’s impact on young users.
Four states — Colorado, Kentucky, California and New Jersey — are leading the claims being tested at trial. Their attorneys general allege that Meta intentionally designed its products to encourage compulsive engagement among young users and misled consumers about the risks associated with its platforms.
The states are also seeking remedies that would apply nationally rather than being limited to individual jurisdictions.
Among the requested changes are age restrictions for young users, elimination of infinite scrolling and modifications to Meta’s algorithms. The states also want Meta to delete algorithms and artificial intelligence models created using children’s data and alter its recommendation systems to prioritise user well-being over engagement.
Other proposed restrictions include tighter time limits for young users and changes to notification systems.
If imposed, such measures could fundamentally alter the way Facebook and Instagram operate for millions of users.
Meta Strongly Rejects the Allegations
Meta has strongly denied the accusations and maintains that it has spent years working to improve safety for children and teenagers.
A company spokesperson said Meta disagreed with the allegations and was confident that evidence presented during the trial would demonstrate its longstanding commitment to supporting young people.
The company has pointed to its work with parents, experts and law enforcement, as well as research intended to better understand the issues affecting young users.
Meta has also challenged the legal premise behind some of the allegations. The company has argued that it could not have misled consumers by claiming that its platforms were not addictive because “social media addiction” is not recognised as a psychiatric condition.
The company has further warned that the growing volume of litigation could have serious consequences for its business and financial results.
Mark Zuckerberg and Adam Mosseri Expected to Testify
The proceedings are expected to draw significant attention because of the senior Meta executives who may appear as witnesses.
Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s founder and chief executive, is expected to testify, along with Adam Mosseri, who leads Instagram.
Their testimony could provide insight into how Meta approached youth safety, platform design, engagement and the company’s internal understanding of potential risks to younger users.
The litigation has already brought renewed attention to internal company discussions about the impact of social media on teenagers.
The controversy intensified after former Meta employee and whistleblower Frances Haugen testified before a U.S. Senate committee in 2021. Haugen alleged that Meta knew its products could harm young users and possessed information that could have helped make the platforms safer, but did not make sufficient changes because of business priorities.
The states’ current case grew out of the broader investigation that followed those disclosures.
What the States Want Meta to Change
The legal battle is not limited to a demand for monetary damages. The states are seeking extensive changes to Meta’s products and business practices.
Among their requested remedies are:
- Stronger age restrictions for users.
- Changes to the way Meta verifies users’ ages.
- Elimination of infinite-scroll features.
- Restrictions on notifications aimed at young users.
- Deletion of algorithms and AI models created using children’s data.
- Changes to recommendation algorithms.
- Greater emphasis on well-being rather than engagement.
- Strict time limits for young users.
- Additional safeguards surrounding children’s data.
These demands make the case particularly significant for Meta because a ruling imposing such measures could affect the fundamental mechanics of its platforms.
Recommendation algorithms and engagement features are central to the way modern social media services operate. Changes to those systems could therefore have consequences extending well beyond youth safety.
The $1.4 Trillion Question
The potential financial exposure is one of the most closely watched aspects of the trial.
Meta has estimated that damages could reach approximately $1.4 trillion, although that figure represents the company’s assessment of potential exposure rather than a publicly confirmed amount that a court has ordered or that the states have definitively requested.
The figure is striking because it is close to Meta’s market value.
Legal experts have cautioned that the ultimate financial outcome could be very different from the company’s estimate. Nevertheless, the possibility of extremely large damages illustrates why the case is being viewed as a major threat to social media companies.
Eric Goldman, a professor and co-director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara University School of Law, said large damage awards and judicial orders requiring changes to platform features could pose existential risks to social media defendants.
Meta Faces Pressure After Recent Court Losses
The Oakland trial begins at a difficult time for Meta from a legal standpoint.
The company recently suffered another major setback in New Mexico, where a judge ordered Meta to pay $567 million and implement changes to its platforms following findings related to harm to young users. The new order followed an earlier $375 million civil penalty, bringing the total financial liability in that case to $942 million.
The New Mexico case also resulted in proposed or ordered changes involving age verification, restrictions on certain interactions and measures designed to protect minors.
Meta has said it intends to appeal the New Mexico ruling.
The recent outcome has increased scrutiny of the company’s legal strategy as it prepares to defend itself against the 29-state federal case.
Thousands of Other Lawsuits Are Waiting
The Meta trial is only one part of a much larger legal battle over social media and youth safety.
More than 3,000 lawsuits brought by school districts, individuals and others against Meta, Snap, Alphabet’s YouTube and ByteDance’s TikTok have been centralised before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in federal court.
A separate group of more than 3,300 lawsuits, largely brought by individuals, is pending in California state court in Los Angeles.
Meta’s own annual report acknowledges extensive litigation concerning alleged social media addiction, youth mental health harms, child safety and privacy issues. The company has said these cases could lead to substantial damages and injunctive relief.
The volume of litigation means that the legal consequences of the Oakland trial could extend far beyond the 29 states directly involved.
A ruling establishing that certain platform-design decisions can result in liability could potentially strengthen the arguments of plaintiffs in other pending cases.
An Unusual Advisory Jury
Another unusual feature of the Oakland proceedings is the role of the jury.
U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers is overseeing the case and has chosen to empanel an advisory jury.
Unlike a conventional jury whose verdict may determine the outcome of a case, an advisory jury will provide findings on specific questions selected by the judge. Rogers will then use those findings to help guide her ultimate decision, although she is not legally required to follow the advisory jury’s conclusions.
Advisory juries are rarely used, making the structure of this trial notable in its own right.
Judge Rogers is expected to issue her decision after the proceedings conclude, potentially in October.
Meta’s Failed Attempt to Delay the Proceedings
Meta made a final effort to delay the trial and halt thousands of other lawsuits but suffered a setback shortly before proceedings began.
A U.S. court rejected the company’s appeal concerning rulings that allowed the cases to proceed. The decision means the broader litigation campaign against Meta and other social media companies remains active.
The ruling removes one potential avenue for Meta to stop or significantly slow the litigation before the Oakland trial moves forward.
For plaintiffs, the decision represents another step toward testing their claims in court rather than resolving them through preliminary legal challenges.
A Broader Reckoning Over Social Media and Children
The litigation reflects a growing global debate about the impact of social media on children and teenagers.
Concerns about excessive screen time, algorithmic recommendations, online privacy, cyberbullying and exposure to harmful content have increasingly become issues for lawmakers, regulators, parents and schools.
A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll cited in the case found that 85% of Americans believe social media can be addictive for children, while 61% said social media companies need stronger oversight.
Those figures illustrate the wider public concern surrounding the issue.
At the same time, technology companies argue that social media provides significant benefits, including communication, entertainment, education and access to communities. They have also introduced parental controls, age-related restrictions and other safety features.
The central legal question is increasingly whether those measures are sufficient and whether companies knew more about potential risks than they publicly acknowledged.
What the Trial Could Mean for the Technology Industry
The implications of the Meta case could extend well beyond Facebook and Instagram.
Other technology companies, including Snap, Google/YouTube and TikTok parent ByteDance, face similar allegations in lawsuits across the United States.
A ruling against Meta could encourage additional lawsuits and strengthen calls for legislative action surrounding children’s online safety.
It could also pressure technology companies to reconsider features that maximise engagement, particularly when those features are used by minors.
Conversely, a significant victory for Meta could make it more difficult for states and private plaintiffs to establish liability based on allegations involving platform design and social media use.
The outcome could therefore help define the legal boundaries between technological innovation, consumer protection, child safety and corporate responsibility.
Meta’s Youth Safety Battle Enters a Defining Phase
The Oakland proceedings represent a defining moment in the growing legal campaign over social media’s impact on young users.
With 29 states involved, potentially enormous financial exposure, requests for nationwide platform changes and testimony expected from Meta’s highest-profile executives, the trial has consequences that extend well beyond a single courtroom.
For Meta, the company must defend its approach to platform design, youth safety and children’s data while facing mounting pressure from courts and regulators.
For the states, the case provides an opportunity to test whether social media companies can be held legally accountable for designing products that allegedly encourage compulsive use among children and teenagers.
As jury selection begins and opening statements approach on August 18, the focus will shift to the evidence surrounding Meta’s internal decisions, its treatment of young users and the effectiveness of its safety measures.
Whatever Judge Rogers ultimately decides, the case is likely to become a major reference point in the continuing debate over how far technology companies should be held responsible for the consequences of their products — particularly when those products are used by children.
