US Court Examines Meta's Role in Youth Use of Facebook and Instagram

A federal judge in Manhattan has opened a high‑profile trial that will determine whether Meta Platforms Inc. bears responsibility for alleged harms to children using its flagship services, Facebook and Instagram. The case stems from a lawsuit filed in 2022 by a coalition of 33 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, which accuses the company of designing its apps to keep young users engaged for longer periods, thereby contributing to mental‑health challenges.

During opening arguments, Meta’s legal team asserted that “social‑media addiction” is not a recognized medical condition and that the company cannot be held liable for how teenagers choose to use its products. The defense emphasized parental oversight and the availability of built‑in safety tools, arguing that the platforms themselves do not compel addictive behavior.

Prosecutors representing the states countered that Meta’s internal research, leaked documents and public statements reveal a deliberate strategy to target minors. They pointed to features such as endless scrolling, algorithmic content recommendations and notification systems that, according to the plaintiffs, are engineered to maximize screen time among younger audiences.

The trial, which could set a precedent for how tech firms are regulated in the United States, will also explore whether Meta’s disclosures to lawmakers and the public were adequate. Experts called to testify are expected to discuss the psychological impact of constant social‑media exposure on adolescents, including links to anxiety, depression and sleep disturbances.

If the jury finds Meta liable, the company could face billions of dollars in damages and be required to implement stricter safeguards for under‑18 users. The outcome may influence future legislation aimed at curbing the influence of digital platforms on children’s well‑being.

The proceedings are slated to continue over several weeks, with both sides preparing extensive evidence. Observers note that the case represents one of the most significant legal challenges to a major tech firm in recent years, highlighting growing public scrutiny of how social‑media giants shape the online experiences of the next generation.