Key facts
- Meta Platforms faces a trial in California federal court with 29 states alleging its platforms are addictive to children.
- The trial will also address claims of misleading consumers about platform safety and illegally collecting children's data.
- Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri are expected to testify.
- A judge ordered Meta to pay $567 million to New Mexico for fostering social media addiction and other harms.
- Law firm Motley Rice could earn up to $67.1 million in legal fees from New Mexico's recovery.
- Meta plans to appeal the rulings.
Meta Platforms is facing a landmark trial in California federal court, with 29 states alleging the company intentionally designed its platforms, Facebook and Instagram, to be addictive to children. The trial will also address claims that Meta misled consumers about platform safety and illegally collected children's data. This case is considered pivotal for youth social media litigation.
In parallel, thousands of lawsuits have been filed by states, school districts, and individuals against social media companies, including Meta, Google, TikTok, and Snap, alleging intentional design to keep young users engaged and contributing to mental health issues. The companies deny these allegations, citing measures to protect young users and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Previous legal actions have seen mixed results. New Mexico secured a $567 million public nuisance ruling and a $375 million civil penalty against Meta, which the company plans to appeal. A Los Angeles jury found Meta and Google negligent in a separate case, ordering Meta to pay $4.2 million and Google $1.8 million, with both companies intending to appeal. A trial in Tennessee is also underway concerning Meta's alleged violation of consumer protection laws. Settlements have also been reached, including a $27 million agreement for a Kentucky school district.
Law firm Motley Rice stands to earn up to $67.1 million in legal fees from New Mexico's recovery in its case against Meta, based on a contract that allows for fees contingent on the payout amount. The firm stated it is premature to discuss payment and will continue to support the state in holding Meta accountable.