Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta has failed to persuade a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit brought by 29 state attorneys general that alleges the company knowingly designed Facebook and Instagram to be addictive to children while hiding related risks.
Reuters reports that U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers issued a ruling this week denying Meta’s motion to dismiss claims focused on deceptive practices, unfair business conduct and violations of the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. The decision represents a significant development in ongoing litigation that accuses the social media giant of prioritizing engagement over the well-being of young users.
Judge Gonzalez Rogers determined that Meta failed to comply with children’s online privacy laws regarding notice and parental consent requirements. The Court granted summary judgment to the states on this specific issue, eliminating the need for a trial on that particular claim.
The lawsuit, filed by attorneys general from 29 states, alleges that Meta knowingly created features designed to keep children engaged on its platform despite being aware of the potential harm. According to the states’ claims, research shows that Facebook and Instagram use by children can contribute to depression, anxiety, insomnia, disruption in learning and daily activities, and self-harm, including suicide.
In a statement to Breitbart News, a spokesperson wrote: “We strongly disagree with these allegations and we are confident the evidence will show our long-term commitment to supporting young people. For more than a decade, we have listened to parents, worked with experts and law enforcement, and conducted extensive research to understand the most important issues. We are proud of the progress we have made, and we are always working to do better.”
California Attorney General Rob Bonta called the ruling a “significant victory” in efforts to hold Meta accountable for fueling mental health crises among American children.
In its defense, Meta argued that the Attorney General lacked evidence proving that the company misled consumers about the alleged addictive nature of its platforms. The company specifically pointed to Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg’s testimony to Congress. Meta argued that because “social media addiction” is not recognized as an established psychiatric condition, statements claiming that its platforms are not addictive cannot be proven false.
However, in his 38-page decision, Judge Gonzalez Rogers identified factual disputes related to whether Meta’s social media platforms are actually addictive, whether the company denied designing them to be addictive, and whether Meta “partially” directed the platforms to children.
“AG offers a reasonable explanation [Meta’s] “Facebook and Instagram are not designed to compel teens to compulsively use the platforms,” Judge Gonzalez Rogers wrote in his opinion.
Judge Gonzalez Rogers also oversees multi-district litigation involving more than 2,600 individuals, school districts and local governments. This sweeping legal action examines whether social media platforms including Facebook, Instagram, Google’s YouTube, Snapchat and TikTok create addictive experiences for children.
Breitbart News reported in March that Meta had been found negligent in a landmark child social media addiction case:
In a precedent-setting verdict, jurors in a high-profile social media addiction trial deliberated for more than 40 hours over nine days before determining that both Meta and YouTube were negligent in the design and operation of their platforms. The jury concluded that each company’s negligence was a significant factor in causing harm to the plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman who testified that social media use in her childhood created an addiction to technology and exacerbated her mental health problems.
Multimillion-dollar awards are expected to increase significantly as jurors determine that companies acted with malicious or extremely serious conduct. This finding means a jury will soon hear additional evidence and deliberate to decide on punitive damages, which could significantly increase the total compensation.
Meta and Google-owned YouTube were the last two defendants left in the case after TikTok and Snap reached a settlement before the trial began. The plaintiff, identified as KGM in court documents and referred to as Kelly by her legal team during the proceedings, testified alongside high-profile technology executives. Meta leaders Mark Zuckerberg and Adam Mosseri appeared as witnesses, while YouTube CEO Neil Mohan was not called to testify.
Read more here on Reuters.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of AI, free speech, and online censorship.
