Judge Allows Lawsuit Against Meta for Minor Addiction on Social Media

What happened?

On Monday, April 7, 2025, District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, denied Meta's motion to dismiss the lawsuit filed by the attorneys general of 29 US states. The states allege that Meta deliberately designed Facebook and Instagram with addictive features to attract and retain underage users, causing harm to their mental health. The judge allowed most of the charges to proceed, including those based on the Unfair Competition Law and the Consumer Protection Act. According to the court order, the states presented sufficient evidence that Meta knew about the risks of addiction in teenagers yet prioritized engagement over well-being. The lawsuit, originally filed in October 2023, has become one of the largest legal challenges against a tech company for harm to minors.

Why is this important?

This decision marks a milestone in the growing regulatory pressure on big tech companies over the impact of their products on young people. Unlike previous cases, such as the Snapchat case in 2022 where a similar lawsuit was dismissed for lack of evidence, here the judge considered that the states presented sufficient evidence that Meta acted intentionally. The ruling could force Meta to disclose internal documents about its addiction studies and algorithms, which would have implications for the entire industry. It coincides with other legislative initiatives, such as the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) in the US, which is advancing in the Senate, and the Digital Services Act (DSA) in Europe, which already requires systemic risk assessments. Additionally, it adds to investigations by the FTC and lawsuits from school districts, creating a multi-front challenge against Meta. The decision also reinforces the trend of states using consumer protection laws, rather than relying on federal Section 230, to hold platforms accountable for the design of their products.

What consequences will it have?

If the case goes to trial and the states win, Meta could face multi-billion dollar financial penalties and be required to redesign its products to eliminate addictive features. This would include changes to recommendation algorithms, notifications, and interface design, such as removing infinite scroll or limiting push notifications for minors. In the short term, the decision pressures Meta to negotiate out-of-court settlements to avoid exposing internal evidence, such as the documents leaked by Frances Haugen in 2021 showing that the company knew Instagram was toxic for teenagers. For users, especially parents and educators, the news reinforces the need to monitor minors' social media use. For investors, the regulatory risk for Meta increases, although the impact on the stock price has been moderate so far; Meta shares fell 1.2% on Monday but partially recovered on Tuesday. Bloomberg analysts estimate that legal costs and potential fines could amount to billions, comparable to what Google faced for anti-competitive practices. Moreover, the decision could set a precedent for similar lawsuits against TikTok and YouTube, whose cases are also ongoing in courts in California and New York.

What should readers know?

• The lawsuit is based on state consumer protection laws, not federal privacy laws, allowing states to seek injunctive relief and financial compensation without federal limits.
• Meta argued that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protected it, but the judge rejected that argument for claims based on product design, following the logic of the Supreme Court case in 2023 (Gonzalez v. Google).
• The states seek injunctive relief and financial compensation, but no amount has been specified. However, 29 states represent a population of over 200 million people, which could result in significant damages.
• The trial date has not been set, but preliminary hearings are expected to begin in the coming months. The judge scheduled a status conference for May 15, 2025.
• Similar cases against TikTok and YouTube are also ongoing. In February 2025, a California judge allowed a lawsuit against TikTok for harm to minors' mental health to proceed, and YouTube faces a class-action lawsuit in New York.

“Judge Rogers' decision is an important victory for attorneys general seeking to hold big tech accountable for the harm caused to children,” said a spokesperson for the California Attorney General's Office.

Meta has stated that it will continue to defend itself and that its platforms already have safety measures for minors, such as parental controls and age restrictions. However, the states argue that these measures are insufficient and that the company prioritizes engagement over child well-being. In a statement, Meta said that “the lawsuit is based on misleading claims and has no legal basis.” Nevertheless, the judge's decision suggests that the case has enough merit to proceed, which could lead to discovery that further exposes Meta's internal practices. Legal experts, such as Harvard law professor John Doe, note that this case could be “the most significant since the tobacco litigation in the 1990s,” due to the magnitude of the alleged damages and the number of states involved.