Meta is facing a closely watched federal trial in California over allegations that its social media platforms exposed children and teenagers to harmful experiences and encouraged them to spend excessive amounts of time online.
The case centres on Facebook and Instagram, two of Meta’s biggest platforms. Authorities from 29 US states have joined the broader legal action, arguing that Meta knew about potential risks to young users but did not do enough to address them.
The proceedings are being held in Oakland and could become an important test of how technology companies are held accountable for the design of their digital products.
At the centre of the dispute is the way Meta’s platforms are built. State authorities are examining features including personalised content recommendations, endless scrolling, notifications and other tools designed to keep users engaged.
Prosecutors argue that these features can encourage repetitive and prolonged use, particularly among teenagers. They are also expected to examine whether Meta’s product decisions prioritised engagement and time spent on its platforms over the wellbeing of younger users.
The case also raises questions about children’s online privacy. Authorities have accused Meta of collecting information from children without obtaining the consent required under US law. The allegations add a data-protection dimension to the wider dispute over youth safety.
Meta has denied wrongdoing. The company says it has introduced several measures to make its platforms safer for teenagers and has invested heavily in technology, parental controls and privacy protections.
The company has also challenged the idea that social media can be directly blamed for the mental health problems alleged in the case. Meta is expected to argue that the evidence does not establish that its products caused the claimed harm.
Still, internal documents and research are likely to receive significant attention during the trial. Earlier investigations have highlighted Meta’s own research into how teenagers interacted with its platforms and the concerns some internal studies raised about their experiences.
The states are seeking to establish that Meta was aware of these concerns while continuing to operate products built around high levels of user engagement.
The allegations include claims involving anxiety, depression, body-image concerns and other mental health issues. State officials argue that children and teenagers can be particularly vulnerable to technologies designed to encourage repeated interaction.
The case comes as Meta faces growing pressure to strengthen protections for minors. The company has introduced teen-specific accounts and tightened some privacy and content settings. It has also expanded parental supervision tools and restrictions aimed at reducing exposure to inappropriate content.
However, critics say the changes do not answer the larger question of whether the underlying business model encourages excessive engagement.
The trial is being overseen by US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. An advisory jury is participating in the proceedings, although it will not deliver the final verdict. The judge will make the ultimate decision after considering the evidence.
Meta executives could also face questioning about the company’s product strategy, internal research and decisions concerning younger users.
The proceedings are significant because they focus not only on content posted by users but also on the technology and algorithms that determine what people see. Recommendation systems are central to modern social media platforms, helping companies personalise feeds and increase engagement.
A ruling against Meta could therefore have consequences across the technology industry. Other platforms using similar recommendation systems could face greater scrutiny over how their algorithms affect younger audiences.
Meta is already dealing with legal and regulatory pressure on several fronts. TikTok, YouTube and Snap have also faced lawsuits or investigations concerning alleged risks to children and teenagers.
The growing number of cases has pushed child online safety higher on the US technology policy agenda. Regulators and lawmakers are examining proposals involving age verification, parental controls, targeted advertising, privacy protections and greater transparency around recommendation algorithms.
For social media companies, the debate presents a difficult balance. Platforms rely heavily on personalised technology to keep users engaged, but the same systems are increasingly being questioned when they are used by minors.
Meta says it is committed to improving its products and protecting young people. State authorities, however, want the company to go further and accept greater responsibility for the consequences of its product design.
The California trial could ultimately influence how technology companies develop features aimed at younger audiences. It may also determine whether engagement-focused design can become the basis for legal liability when authorities believe it contributes to harm.
Beyond Meta, the case could shape the future of social media regulation in the US. If the states succeed, technology companies may face stronger obligations to demonstrate that their algorithms, recommendation systems and engagement features are safe for children.
