A landmark federal trial commenced in Oakland, California, as attorneys representing 29 U.S. states accused Meta of deliberately concealing internal research that showed Instagram was highly addictive for teenagers. The legal challenge, which is expected to last between six and eight weeks, alleges that the social media giant knowingly designed features to hook young users while publicly downplaying the associated mental health risks.
During the opening day of the trial, state lawyers presented a series of internal Meta documents uncovered during their investigation. Attorney O’Neill told the packed courtroom that the evidence would expose the company's true motives. She highlighted internal communications, including one document stating that "the young ones are the best ones" and another admitting that "Teens are hooked despite how it makes them feel. Instagram is addictive." O’Neill argued that Meta prioritized financial gain over safety, telling the jury, "They knew. Time and again, profits won."
The 233-page lawsuit, first filed in October 2023, claims that Meta systematically designed psychologically manipulative features to maximize user engagement. These features include infinite scrolling recommendation algorithms, constant notification alerts, thumbs-up "likes," and visual filters that alter appearance. According to the states, these features exploit the vulnerabilities of young people, leading to increased rates of depression, anxiety, eating disorders, and other mental health issues. Furthermore, the lawsuit alleges that Meta routinely collected data on children under the age of 13 without obtaining required parental permission, violating both federal and state laws.
The legal team leading the multidistrict litigation represents attorneys general from California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey. If Meta is found liable, the financial consequences could be staggering. The states are seeking damages of up to $200 billion, an amount equivalent to Meta's total annual revenue for 2025. Beyond the financial penalty, the lawmakers are asking the court to compel Meta to fundamentally redesign its products to ensure they are safer for children.
Meta has denied all the allegations. In his opening statement, Meta's defense lawyer, Paul Schmidt, argued that the internal documents and emails presented by the states were cherry-picked and taken out of context. Schmidt stated that Meta's internal studies were actually aimed at finding ways to support teenagers on its platforms. He also noted that Meta has actively disabled more than 1 million accounts belonging to children under the age of 13 to remove underage users. A spokesperson for Meta released a statement criticizing the lawsuit, claiming that "rather than sticking to the facts or the law, the states have instead decided to chase an outlandish payout."
The trial represents a major escalation in the legal battles surrounding social media safety. The strategy employed by the state attorneys general draws heavily from the historic 1990s litigation against major tobacco companies, which focused on the addictive nature of cigarettes and the manufacturers' concealment of health risks. Those actions resulted in a landmark $200 billion settlement in 1998 and forced sweeping changes to marketing practices.
Russell Coleman, the Attorney General of Kentucky, confirmed that prosecutors are using that exact blueprint. "Meta concealed what it knew about the harm its products cause young people," Coleman said. "AGs are in the perfect position to get this done. We did it with the tobacco settlement in the 1990s. We did it with the companies behind the opioid crisis. We’ll do it again with Meta."
This federal trial is part of a broader wave of litigation. Just two weeks prior, a judge ordered Meta to pay $567 million to New Mexico in a similar case, bringing Meta's total financial penalties in that state to $942 million. Another state trial is currently underway in Tennessee. Additionally, thousands of coordinated lawsuits have been filed by families, school districts, and other attorneys general in California state courts against Meta, YouTube, TikTok, and Snap. In February, Meta and YouTube lost the first of those cases to go to trial, resulting in a $6 million judgment for a young female plaintiff, while TikTok and Snap settled. Two other trials scheduled for this summer also ended in undisclosed settlements.
