In a significant legal setback for Meta Platforms, a federal judge has rejected the company's bid to dismiss a lawsuit filed by 29 US state attorneys general. The lawsuit accuses Meta of designing Facebook and Instagram to addict children and knowingly concealing the resulting harm from the public. The decision, issued late Monday by US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, allows claims based on deception, unfair practices, and violations of the federal Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) to proceed.
Judge Rules Meta Failed to Comply with COPPA
Judge Gonzalez Rogers also ruled that Meta did not comply with COPPA's notice and parental consent requirements, granting summary judgment to the states on that issue. This part of the ruling is a critical victory for the plaintiffs, as it establishes a violation of the law without the need for a trial. Meta, in a statement, expressed strong disagreement with the allegations and expressed confidence that evidence will show its commitment to supporting young people. California Attorney General Rob Bonta hailed the decision as a “critical win” in holding Meta accountable for fueling a mental health crisis among American children.
Underlying Research on Child Harm
The states' lawsuit is grounded in research indicating that children's use of Facebook and Instagram can lead to depression, anxiety, insomnia, interference with education and daily life, and self-harm, including suicide. Meta had argued that the attorneys general lacked evidence that it misled consumers about the platforms' addictiveness, including in congressional testimony by CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Meta contended that “social media addiction” is not an established psychiatric condition, making statements that its platforms are not addictive not false. Additionally, Meta claimed it did not violate COPPA because it directed Facebook and Instagram to a general audience, not specifically to children under 13.
Factual Disputes Over Addictiveness Found
In a 38-page decision, Judge Gonzalez Rogers identified material factual disputes over whether Meta's platforms are addictive, whether Meta falsely denied designing them that way, and whether Meta “partially” directed the platforms at children. The judge noted that the attorneys general present a reasonable interpretation of Meta's statements that Facebook and Instagram are not designed to cause teens to compulsively use them to their detriment. She added that if the plaintiffs' evidence shows the platforms are in fact designed to do just that, a jury could reasonably find the statements untrue to a reasonable person.
Broader Multidistrict Litigation
Judge Gonzalez Rogers also oversees a related multidistrict litigation involving more than 2,600 individuals, school districts, and local governments. That case centers on whether social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Google, YouTube, Snapchat, and TikTok addict children. A trial over claims brought by California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey against Meta is scheduled for August 18, according to court records.
