Meta Platforms has gone on trial in the United States over allegations that it deliberately designed Facebook and Instagram to keep children and teenagers hooked on its platforms, harvested their personal data and concealed the risks from parents and the public in pursuit of profit.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/ELLAN.png")
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
A bipartisan coalition of 29 US states is pursuing the case against the social media giant in a federal court in Oakland, California, in what experts have described as one of the most significant legal tests yet of the impact of social media platforms on young users.
The trial began with opening statements on Tuesday before US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.
Four states California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey are leading the case on behalf of the coalition, accusing Meta of designing features on Facebook and Instagram to encourage compulsive use by young people while allegedly contributing to anxiety, depression and, in some cases, suicidal behaviour.
The states also allege that Meta misled consumers about the safety of its platforms and improperly collected and used personal information belonging to children, including those under the age of 13, without obtaining parental consent as required by federal law.
Meta has denied the allegations, rejecting claims that it intentionally sought to addict children or designed its platforms to harm young users.
In her opening argument, California Deputy Attorney General Megan O’Neill told the eight-member jury that Meta’s business model was built around keeping users on its platforms for as long as possible.
She accused the company of seeking 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,” O’Neill said. “Meta needed kids, and it needed to reassure the people who cared about those kids that the kids are safe.”
She further alleged that Meta “exploited how kids’ brains work” by researching how children responded to online stimulation and monitoring their interactions with its platforms.
The states presented internal company material which, according to O’Neill, showed that increasing “teen time spent” on Instagram was treated as a company objective.
She also referred to internal communications in which some Meta employees allegedly described Instagram as a “drug” and themselves as “pushers.”
“Meta found the younger a kid is when they start using the app, the better,” O’Neill told the court.
Meta’s lawyer, Paul Schmidt, rejected the states’ interpretation of the company’s conduct.
Schmidt acknowledged that some people experience difficulties associated with social media use but argued that such experiences did not establish that Meta’s products were addictive.
He also said research had not established a clear causal relationship between adolescent social media use and reduced well-being.
According to Schmidt, Meta and its co-founder and Chief Executive Officer, Mark Zuckerberg, had sought to improve the company’s services and make them safer rather than deliberately expose young users to harm.
“They don’t believe they’re going to do well if people don’t like their service,” he said.
Schmidt argued that informal or “loose” language used by employees in private communications should not be treated as evidence that the company intentionally designed harmful products.
He said jurors would also hear evidence about measures taken by Meta employees to make the platforms safer.
Meta said it had worked with parents, experts and law enforcement agencies to develop protections for children and teenagers.
The company also said it had flagged about 1.4 million accounts over a four-year period where it suspected that users might be under the age of 13.
The states insist, however, that the case is not aimed at shutting down Meta or social media generally.
“This case is not about whether social media has some benefits for some people. It does,” O’Neill told jurors.
Rather, prosecutors argue that Meta adopted business practices that exploited children while allegedly failing to properly disclose the dangers associated with some features of its platforms.
Beyond financial penalties, the case could result in significant changes to the way Facebook and Instagram operate.
The jury is expected to deliver an advisory verdict, while Judge Gonzalez Rogers will ultimately determine Meta’s liability.
If the company is found liable, the judge could impose civil penalties and order structural changes to Facebook and Instagram.
The states have suggested that potential penalties could be around $200 billion, although Meta has warned that the legal theory being pursued could expose it to penalties reaching as high as $1.4 trillion.
The states are also seeking changes to features they say encourage excessive use.
California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey are asking for measures that could include restrictions on the use of “likes,” changes to infinite scrolling, age-based limitations and screen-time controls for younger users.
The states allege that some of the existing controls designed to limit young users’ screen time can easily be circumvented.
Zuckerberg and Instagram chief Adam Mosseri are expected to testify during the trial, which is scheduled to last approximately six weeks.
The case has drawn comparisons with the landmark litigation brought against tobacco companies by US states in the 1990s.
Some legal experts have described the proceedings as social media’s “big tobacco moment,” arguing that the case could determine whether technology companies can be held responsible for product designs allegedly intended to encourage compulsive behaviour.
Dozens of US states previously sued major tobacco companies for allegedly downplaying the health consequences of their products, resulting in a landmark 1998 settlement involving financial payments and restrictions on marketing practices.
Meta is the sole defendant in the present federal trial, although it is among several major social media companies facing widespread litigation over alleged harm to young users.
Snap, TikTok parent ByteDance and YouTube parent Alphabet are also facing thousands of lawsuits brought by states, local governments, school districts and individuals raising similar concerns about the mental health effects of social media.
The Meta litigation began in 2023, about two years after whistleblower Frances Haugen testified before the US Senate that the company was aware of risks its products posed to children and teenagers but had failed to sufficiently address them while pursuing growth and profits.
The claims remain allegations that Meta contests.
Outside the Oakland courthouse as the trial opened, parents and campaigners gathered to demand greater accountability from social media companies.
Among them was Mary Rodee, whose 15-year-old son Riley Basford died by suicide in 2021 after what she said was an encounter with a predator on Facebook.
“They call it spontaneous suicide,” Rodee said. “I call it what it was, the predictable outcome of a system that protects corporations instead of children.”
Another parent, Lori Schott, criticised Zuckerberg and Mosseri, saying they had built one of the world’s most powerful and wealthy companies but that “power does not excuse harm.”
The latest trial comes amid a series of separate legal challenges against Meta over the treatment and safety of younger users.
In March, a Los Angeles jury ordered Meta and Google to pay $6 million to a 20-year-old woman who alleged she became addicted to Instagram and YouTube as a child.
Earlier in August, a New Mexico judge ordered Meta to pay $567 million in a separate case concerning teenagers’ mental health after the state’s Attorney General characterised the company’s platforms as a public nuisance.
Tennessee is also pursuing a separate trial against Meta, alleging that the company disregarded internal research concerning Instagram’s potential negative effects on teenagers.
The book also examines Nigeria's legal ecosystem, focusing on the LPELR and NBA AI Guidelines. As a bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE eBook titled: How to Use the AI Features in LegalPedia and LawPavilion.
Ohio Books Ltd praises the publication, stating:
"....this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic."
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACIarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
_______________________________________________________________________
“Order Justice Omolaye-Ajileye’s Electronic Evidence Books Now” — Essential Guides On Evidence Act, Case Law And Digital Proof
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
