By The Epoch Times | Created at 2026-08-19 03:36:45 | Updated at 2026-08-19 04:38:43
1 hour ago
Meta Platforms on Aug. 18 denied allegations by 29 states that it deliberately tried to get children addicted to its Facebook and Instagram platforms at a federal trial that began in California.
Meta has estimated that it could face up to $1.4 trillion in penalties, though state attorneys general have said the figure may be closer to $200 billion. Meta currently has a total market capitalization of approximately $1.39 trillion.
The states claim that Meta misled consumers and designed Facebook and Instagram in such a way that they would hook young users, leading to increased anxiety, depression, and even suicide.
The 29 states allege that Meta has violated the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) by collecting personal information from children under 13 without obtaining proper parental consent.
In a second set of claims, California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey accuse Meta of violating consumer protection laws. They allege the company made deceptive statements likely to mislead consumers about the safety of Facebook and Instagram and engaged in unfair business practices related to the design of the platforms.
Meta has said it complied with COPPA and has denied the states’ consumer protection claims. The company argues that “social media addiction” is not an established psychiatric condition and that its past statements denying the platforms’ addictiveness could therefore not be false.
Meta and other social media companies including Snap, YouTube parent Alphabet, and TikTok parent ByteDance, are separately facing thousands of lawsuits filed by states and local governments, school districts, and individuals alleging their products cause harm to young users.
Experts have said the current trial that got underway Aug. 18 in Oakland, California, is the biggest legal test yet of social media’s effects on young users.
California Deputy Attorney General Megan O’Neill told the federal district court that Meta’s business model was to “hook the users, hold them for as long as they can, harvest their data, and then hide the truth from the public.”
“It worked especially well for kids,” she said. “Meta needed kids, and it needed to reassure the people who cared about those kids that the kids are safe.”
O’Neill said the company relied on research on child development, including on how children continuously seek rewards, respond to social feedback, and “how they are still developing their ability to control impulses the way adults do.”
“‘The young ones are the best ones’ is a title of a Meta study we are going to show you,” she told the court, adding that for Meta, “kids are the product.”
The company knew that children under 13 were using its products even though this violated company policy, and Meta “failed to take the simplest most obvious steps to keep them off,” O’Neill said.
Meta’s attorney, Paul Schmidt, acknowledged that some people struggle with social media but said research has not demonstrated a clear link between adolescents’ use of social media and a lack of well-being.
Schmidt said the company and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, who is expected to testify, aim to make their services better without making them dangerous.
He noted that the company constantly faces challenges with negative content on Facebook and Instagram and with young children who lie about their ages to gain access.
“Much of this lawsuit is about the government attorneys and their witnesses saying in trying to improve, we’d do it a little differently,” the lawyer said. “In talking about how to improve, we disagree with how you talk about it. It’s meaningful, and the evidence will be meaningful, these efforts Meta has taken to improve.”
After the attorneys’ opening statements wrapped up, former Meta safety engineer Arturo Bejar testified as the first witness for the states.
He said that “move fast and break things” was a way of thinking at Meta, which adopted a “don’t ask, don’t tell” approach to preventing children under 13 from accessing platforms.
“Many products were shipped into the world … and safety was not a consideration in how it was initially deployed,” Bejar said.
The district court is taking the unusual approach of hearing the case with a judge and an advisory jury that may present non-binding findings.
After Meta said it preferred a bench trial, meaning a judge sitting without a jury, and the states said they wanted a traditional jury trial, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers split the difference.
This means an eight-person advisory jury will answer questions about liability and certain facts and present its findings. She said having an advisory jury, a rarely used legal tool invoked at the discretion of the trial judge, would help her to gauge community standards on issues that affect millions of young people.
At the end of the trial, the judge may agree with the jury, disagree with it, or modify its answers. The ultimate judgment, including injunctions, redesign orders, civil penalties, and disgorgement will be made by the judge. Disgorgement is a legal remedy that forces a defendant to give up profits made from illegal or wrongful acts.
If Gonzalez Rogers finds Meta liable, she could impose civil penalties and order the company to make changes to Facebook and Instagram.
The trial continues.
Bill Pan, Reuters, and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
