Meta is facing a major trial in the United States over claims that Facebook and Instagram were designed to keep children and teenagers using the platforms for long periods, while the company allegedly played down the risks linked to their use.
The case opened Tuesday at the US District Court for the Northern District of California in Oakland, following a multistate investigation into the impact of Meta’s platforms on young users. Opening arguments are expected after jury selection was completed last week and Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected Meta’s request to dismiss the case.
The trial is expected to run for four to six weeks, with Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg expected to appear as a witness.
The lawsuit was filed in 2023 by attorneys general from California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey on behalf of a coalition of 29 states. The states accuse Meta of intentionally designing Facebook and Instagram in ways that encourage addictive or compulsive use among children and teenagers.
They also allege that the company failed to properly disclose the possible harm its platforms could cause young users and broke federal law by collecting personal information from children.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta has accused Meta of knowingly putting young users in contact with what he described as a dangerous product while keeping the risks hidden from the public.
Meta has denied the allegations, saying the claims are not supported by evidence. The company also rejects the suggestion that its platforms caused the harm described by the states and argues that "social media addiction" is not an officially recognised psychiatric diagnosis.
A Meta spokesperson said the states had not shown that users were misled and questioned the amount of money being considered in the case.
"The AGs offer no proof anyone in their states was misled, claim benign features like having an additional Instagram account somehow harmed their residents, and attempt to penalize Meta for industry-wide challenges like age verification. Rather than sticking to the facts or the law, the states have instead decided to chase an outlandish payout," the spokesperson said.
The case carries potentially huge financial consequences for Meta. The company has argued that the damages being sought by the state attorneys general could be as high as $1.4 trillion (Sh180.6 trillion).
However, the attorneys general have not revealed how much they will ask the court to award if they succeed.
Evidence from inside Meta is also expected to play a major role during the trial. Legal expert Monte Mann said internal company records could help establish what Meta knew about the potentially compulsive nature of its products, when it became aware of the concerns and what action it took.
"I will be very interested to see what the internal Meta, Facebook, Instagram documents say about what they knew of the compulsive nature of these products and services; when they knew it; whether they tried to enhance their design elements to take advantage of those things, what they disclosed to the public," Mann said.
The Oakland case comes as Meta faces increasing legal pressure over how its platforms affect children and teenagers.
Earlier this month, a New Mexico court ordered Meta to pay $567 million (Sh73.14 billion) and make changes to improve protections for teenage users on Facebook and Instagram.
That ruling followed a March decision requiring the company to pay $375 million (Sh48.38 billion) for violating state law. The two awards brought Meta's liability in that case to nearly $942 million (Sh121.52 billion).
Meta has challenged those rulings and maintained that it will continue defending its record on protecting teenagers who use its platforms.
The outcome of the Oakland trial could add to the legal pressure facing Meta and test how technology companies are held responsible for the way social media platforms are designed and the possible effects they have on children and teenagers.