Meta faces landmark trial as US states demand structural changes to social media

A jury trial commencing on Tuesday represents a significant legal challenge for Meta, as 29 US states seek to force fundamental alterations to the design and operation of Instagram and Facebook. The proceedings, presided over by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in California, centre on allegations that the social media giant has violated federal and state privacy laws concerning children. The states are not merely seeking financial compensation, estimated in the billions of dollars, but are demanding specific operational changes that would affect how young users interact with the platforms across the United States.

The lawsuit, filed in 2023, accuses Meta of concealing its knowledge of the harm its products cause to young people in order to maximise profit. Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman described the case as the largest consumer protection lawsuit in American history. He stated that the coalition of state attorneys general is positioned to enforce change, drawing parallels to previous settlements regarding tobacco and opioids. The states argue that Meta deliberately targeted child users to hook them on its platforms, thereby expanding its user base and business value, which currently stands at approximately $1.5 trillion on the stock market.

Among the specific changes demanded by the states are the removal of like counts and the elimination of infinite scroll. Other proposed measures include implementing parental verification for teenage users, modifying recommendation algorithms that the states describe as dopamine-manipulating, and removing image filters that alter a user’s appearance. The lawsuit also seeks to prohibit the creation of multiple accounts and to end the use of disappearing or ephemeral posts, such as Instagram Stories. These features are central to the current user experience and are designed to keep users on the platforms for as long as possible. The states contend that Meta makes it difficult for young people to reduce their usage through frequent notifications intended to draw them back to the apps.

Meta has consistently denied these allegations. A company spokeswoman stated that the firm strongly disagrees with the claims and is confident that the evidence will demonstrate its longstanding commitment to supporting young people. The company has handed over more than two million documents in response to the lawsuit. In a separate but related development, a judge in New Mexico recently fined Meta a collective $942 million and ordered similar changes, including the elimination of like counts for users under 18 and restrictions on push notifications. Judge Bryan Biedscheid declared Meta a public nuisance, a designation that has not previously been applied to a social media company. Meta has indicated it will appeal this ruling.

The outcome of the current trial could have far-reaching implications. If the 29 states prevail, Meta would likely be required to enact platform changes across the entire US, as the states involved represent nearly two-thirds of the country’s population. This would mark a significant alteration to the experience of the platforms, which have operated with these features for over a decade. Research cited in the lawsuit points to Meta’s internal findings that like counts drive social comparison, which is linked to increased loneliness, worse body image, and negative mood among young people.

Critics and advocates for children’s online safety have expressed mixed views on the potential impact of such legal actions. Kelly Stonelake, a former Meta executive and whistleblower, suggested that while the legal pressure is substantial, it may not lead to meaningful changes in decision-making at the top of the company. She noted that a significant amount of cognitive dissonance exists within the industry regarding the harm caused to vulnerable people. Despite these reservations, the trial is viewed as a major test for the social media sector, following a series of recent legal losses for Meta over its targeting of young users. The case highlights a growing legal and regulatory focus on the mental health impacts of social media engagement metrics and platform design.