OAKLAND, California — Meta is facing one of the most consequential legal challenges in its history as a coalition of U.S. states takes the tech giant to court over allegations that Facebook and Instagram were deliberately designed to keep young users hooked.
The landmark trial, now underway in federal court in Oakland, California, centers on explosive claims that Meta prioritized engagement and profits over the safety of children and teenagers. The company, however, has firmly rejected the accusations and says its evidence will demonstrate a serious commitment to protecting young users.
At the heart of the case is a question with potentially global consequences: When does a platform designed to capture attention cross the line into a product accused of causing harm?
The “Hook, Hold, Harvest” Allegation
During opening arguments, lawyers representing the states accused Meta of building a business model around keeping users engaged for as long as possible—particularly young people.
California Deputy Attorney General Megan O’Neill described the alleged strategy in four words: “hook, hold, harvest and hide.” Prosecutors argue that Meta designed features to maximize time spent on its platforms, collected valuable user data and allegedly failed to fully disclose potential risks to children and families.
The lawsuit involves allegations that Facebook and Instagram were designed to exploit young users’ psychological vulnerabilities, contributing to problems such as anxiety and depression. The states also accuse Meta of improperly collecting personal data from children under 13, potentially violating the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA.
Meta denies that it intentionally sought to make its products addictive or dangerous. Its lawyers argue that while some people may struggle with social media use, there is no clear evidence establishing that social media causes a decline in adolescent well-being. The company has also pointed to its safety tools and efforts to remove underage users from its platforms.
The legal fight is being closely watched because it could force changes to some of social media’s most recognizable features.
Could Likes and Infinite Scroll Be Next?
The potential consequences extend far beyond financial penalties.
According to Reuters, the states want Meta to make major changes to Facebook and Instagram, including possible restrictions involving infinite scrolling, likes and time limits for younger users, alongside stronger enforcement against children under 13 using the platforms.
That means the case is not simply about whether Meta could face a massive financial penalty. It could also challenge the very mechanics of the attention-driven social media economy.
The jury’s verdict in the Oakland case is advisory, while U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will ultimately determine liability and any penalties or court-ordered changes. Meta has warned that potential penalties could be extraordinarily high, while the states have suggested a substantially lower—though still enormous—figure.
Former Meta Engineer Delivers Damning Testimony
One of the trial’s most closely watched witnesses is former Meta engineering director Arturo Béjar, who has previously raised concerns about child safety on Instagram.
Béjar testified that, in his view, safety was often treated as an “afterthought” during product development and alleged that the company took a “don’t ask, don’t tell” approach toward children under 13 using its platforms.
He also criticized engagement-focused incentives within the company and questioned whether some safety features were effective enough. Among the concerns raised were autoplay, popularity metrics and other product features that critics argue can encourage prolonged use and social comparison among young people.
Meta disputes the broader allegations and has maintained that it has a responsibility to address teen safety issues and has introduced tools and policies aimed at protecting younger users. The company requires users to be at least 13 to create an account and says it works to detect and remove underage accounts.
A Legal Wave Is Closing In on Big Tech
The Oakland trial is only one front in a rapidly expanding legal battle over social media and youth safety.
Meta and other major technology companies face thousands of lawsuits from states, families, school districts and individuals alleging that social media platforms were designed in ways that encourage compulsive use and contribute to harm among young people.
The pressure has intensified following other recent court developments involving Meta. Reuters reported that a Los Angeles jury earlier this year ordered Meta and Google to pay damages to a young woman who said she became addicted to Instagram and YouTube as a child. Meta is also facing separate legal action in other U.S. states, including Tennessee.
These cases do not all involve the same claims or legal standards, and companies have consistently disputed allegations that their products were intentionally designed to harm children. Still, the growing number of lawsuits signals a major shift: the debate over social media’s impact on young people is increasingly moving from legislatures and public hearings into courtrooms.
Why This Trial Matters Beyond Meta
For years, critics have questioned whether the business model of social media—where user attention drives advertising revenue—creates an inherent conflict between engagement and well-being.
That debate is now being put under unprecedented legal scrutiny.
If the states succeed, the outcome could influence how social media companies design products for minors, how they verify users’ ages and how much responsibility technology platforms bear for the effects of their design choices.
It could also have implications for advertisers. As the legal and public debate grows, brands may face increasing pressure to consider where their advertising money goes and whether engagement-driven digital environments meet evolving expectations around child safety and responsible media.
For Meta, the stakes could hardly be higher.
The company insists it did not set out to addict children and says its platforms provide important benefits by helping people connect. Prosecutors, meanwhile, are attempting to convince the court that Meta knew more about potential harms than it publicly acknowledged and failed to act decisively enough.
The trial is expected to continue for several weeks, with major figures including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram chief Adam Mosseri expected to be closely watched as the case unfolds.
The outcome could determine more than the size of a legal penalty. It could help define what the future of social media looks like for an entire generation.
And as the courtroom battle intensifies, one question remains at the center of it all: Will the platforms that transformed how the world connects now be forced to transform themselves?
Leave a Reply