That’s according to a report Tuesday (Aug. 18) from Reuters, which said the case marks the most significant test to date for social media platforms facing similar youth safety lawsuits.
Meta is facing a group of attorneys general from 29 states who allege that the tech giant intentionally designed its Facebook and Instagram apps to addict teens and younger children. The states also accuse the tech giant of improperly collecting and using children’s personal data, thus violating federal law.
If the states prevail, Meta has said penalties could reach as high as $1.4 trillion, which is close to the company’s market cap. The attorneys general have put the amount at closer to $200 billion, Reuters said.
Beyond financial damages, the plaintiffs are asking the court to order Meta to establish age restrictions and eliminate features like “infinite scroll,” the report added.
Meta has defended its record, with a spokesperson stating that the states’ claims are “unsubstantiated.” The company argues that it has strong protections for teens and that the states have not shown evidence of actual harm. Meta characterized the litigation as a “chase for an outlandish payout” rather than a factual or legal challenge.
The case has its origins in a 2023 investigation sparked by whistleblower Frances Haugen, who testified in 2021 that Meta prioritized profits over the safety of its users despite in-house research showing possible harms.
High-profile witnesses, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri, are expected to testify during the multiweek proceedings, the report added.
The trial follows a jury verdict in California earlier this year that found Meta and Google were negligent for operating products that harmed kids and failing to warn about the danger.
Jurors ordered the companies to pay a combined $3 million to the plaintiff, who testified that her social media use as a child contributed to mental health issues.
The plaintiff’s attorneys said that the verdict is a referendum on an entire social media industry and that the “verdict is bigger than one case.”
Both Meta and Google have said they disagree with the verdict. Meta said at the time that it was evaluating its options, with Google planning an appeal.
“This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site,” a Google spokesperson said at the time.
Meta is also appealing a similar verdict in the case in which the New Mexico attorney general accused the company of misleading users about the safety of its platforms and failing to properly prevent child sexual exploitation.
