- Trial set to begin Tuesday in federal court in Oakland, California as four states are pushing for Meta to pay $1.4 trillion over allegations that its platform is addictive for underage users.
- Four states — California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey — are seeking extensive financial damages that could total as much as $1.4 trillion, plus changes to how the company operates Facebook and Instagram.
- The lawsuit accuses Meta of violating the federal Children's Online Privacy Protection Act by gathering data from children without parental consent and contributing to the youth mental health crisis by knowingly designing features that get children addicted to its platforms.
- Meta has denied the accusation, arguing that the attorneys general lack evidence that it misled the public about its platforms' alleged addictiveness because social media addiction is not a psychiatric condition.
- Meta calls the possible penalty 'untethered to any claimed violation' by the states.
- 'A sanction of that size has no analog in the history of consumer protection enforcement,' Meta said in a July 6 filing with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
- 'It’s not plausible in the sense that Meta doesn’t have that much money and could not get it,' said James Grimmelmann, a law professor at Cornell Law School and Cornell Tech.
- 'An award that large would put Meta into bankruptcy, wipe out its owners, and effectively result in the states owning Meta.'
Meta is embroiled in a significant legal battle as four states—California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey—filed a lawsuit seeking $1.4 trillion in damages. The states allege that Meta violated the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act by collecting data from minors without parental consent and fostering addiction among young users.2
The lawsuit claims that Meta's platforms, particularly Facebook and Instagram, are designed to be addictive, contributing to a growing youth mental health crisis. The states argue that the company knowingly created features that lead to this addiction, which they assert is a violation of federal law.
In response, Meta has denied these allegations, stating that the attorneys general lack sufficient evidence to support their claims. The company argues that social media addiction is not recognized as a psychiatric condition and that the proposed penalty is disproportionate. Meta described the potential penalty as 'untethered to any claimed violation' and emphasized that such a financial sanction could lead to bankruptcy, effectively transferring ownership of the company to the states.5
'A sanction of that size has no analog in the history of consumer protection enforcement,' Meta stated in a court filing. Legal experts, like James Grimmelmann, a law professor at Cornell Law School, echoed this sentiment, noting that the financial demands are implausible given Meta's financial standing.6
“The lawsuit claims Meta violated the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act by collecting data from children without consent and contributing to a youth mental health crisis. Meta has denied these allegations, arguing that the proposed penalty is excessive and could lead to bankruptcy, as noted by law professor James Grimmelmann.”
