Dozens of states are taking Meta Platforms to trial in California in what is considered the most significant legal battle yet over the alleged harms social media inflicts on children. The lawsuit, filed three years ago, accuses the tech giant of knowingly designing features that addict children to Facebook and Instagram and of violating federal law by collecting data on users under 13 without parental consent.
Attorneys general from four states – California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey – are leading the trial, which began Tuesday in federal court in Oakland. Twenty-five other states are expected to pursue their cases later. The states are seeking extensive financial damages, which could theoretically reach $1.4 trillion, and are also pushing for changes in how Meta operates its platforms.
"Meta has harnessed powerful and unprecedented technologies to entice, engage, and ultimately ensnare youth and teens. Its motive is profit, and in seeking to maximize its financial gains," the lawsuit states, according to reports. Meta disputes these allegations and maintains that its evidence will demonstrate its commitment to supporting young people. In a statement, the company said it has "listened to parents, worked with experts and law enforcement, and conducted in-depth research to understand the issues that matter most."
This trial comes at a high-stakes moment for Meta, which has already faced setbacks in two other key cases concerning child and teen well-being this year. The company recently reported a profit decline, partly attributed to $2.4 billion in legal expenses. The potential $1.4 trillion penalty, disclosed by Meta in a legal filing, is nearly equivalent to the company's entire market capitalization. Legal experts, however, deem such a massive award unlikely, with some noting that it could lead to Meta's bankruptcy.
"The state attorneys general are going for the gusto," said Eric Goldman, a professor and co-director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara University School of Law. "They are trying to set the definitive precedent in this case and they have asked for extraordinary damages and they are going to seek extraordinary structural remedies if they succeed."
Meta has characterized the potential penalty as "untethered to any claimed violation" by the states, adding in a July filing that "a sanction of that size has no analog in the history of consumer protection enforcement." Legal experts like James Grimmelmann, a law professor at Cornell Law School and Cornell Tech, noted that while a $1.4 trillion award is not practically feasible for Meta to pay, it could force the company into bankruptcy. He pointed to past cases where courts have awarded significantly less than the maximum potential damages, citing the Anthropic AI case where damages were reduced from $150,000 per book to $3,000 per book.
This federal trial is distinct from a previous case in Los Angeles, where a state court awarded $6 million in damages against Meta and Google's YouTube to a single plaintiff who testified to childhood social media addiction. That earlier case served as a bellwether, with a jury finding both Meta and YouTube negligent in their platform design or operation and responsible for failing to adequately warn users of potential dangers.
The current Oakland case involves state attorneys general as plaintiffs, focusing on alleged violations of state and federal statutes. Rebecca Allensworth, a professor at Vanderbilt University Law School, explained that the case involves multiple statutes, including child privacy, false advertising, and unfair competition laws across four states.
Beyond financial penalties, any court-ordered changes to how Facebook and Instagram operate could have a profound impact. Meta has introduced new features aimed at protecting minors, such as private teen accounts on Instagram with content restrictions and parental controls, as well as AI systems to detect underage users. However, safety advocates argue that more action is needed. A New Mexico judge recently ordered specific safety measures for users within that state, including time limits and AI chatbot restrictions.
Laura Marquez-Garrett of the Social Media Victims Law Center described the ongoing trials as a "real point of reckoning" for these companies and a significant step forward. During jury selection, potential jurors acknowledged Meta's contribution to the youth mental health crisis but also pointed to parental responsibility and broader societal issues like climate change as contributing factors.