The Meta social media harm case represents the potential for precedent that could enable victims of these platforms to recover damages. Meta is facing well over 1,000 lawsuits for social media harm from various plaintiffs as part of in re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability. As there are so many lawsuits pending across several districts, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California will hear the case in an effort to consolidate. In short, the allegation is that the platforms are harming the well-being of minors. We will discuss the allegations as to how the platforms harm minors below. At the center of the trial, the jury must decide whether design choices such as the infinite scroll, explore page recommendations, and constant notifications fall under the “defective product” category of product liability.
On the other side of the pending litigation, we have Meta. Meta denies liability or wrongdoing, contending that users generate the content and that it is not an inherent flaw in the application’s design. But with over 3 billion active users on Facebook and on Instagram, guardrails should be in place. There are lawsuits brought by individuals against Meta, which we discuss here. But school districts and state attorneys general are also filing suit against Meta, alleging many of the same claims. At this time, at least 33 states are filing lawsuits against Meta for these claims, including Washington, DC.
A social media lawyer at Gelb & Gelb can help explain what options may be available to you as you navigate the damages you have suffered due to Instagram and Facebook’s actions.
Core Allegations in the Meta Trial
Across the over 1,000 lawsuits, the allegations vary. However, many of them do keep to a few themes. In one case, a 21-year-old female plaintiff claims the platform affects her self-esteem and causes her to develop depression and an eating disorder. This might be what you would expect. Besides this, allegations also include anxiety, sleep disruption, and even suicide. These are among the most common damages arising from these lawsuits. But what did the social media companies do to deserve responsibility? The allegation is that the defendants are liable under a products liability theory. Specifically, the plaintiffs want to pursue a design defect case. This is the toughest part of product liability law. Plaintiffs argue in their complaints that these social platforms are essentially consumer products and are unreasonably dangerous as designed.
Under McCormack v. Hanscraft Co., a manufacturer has a duty to use reasonable care in designing a product so those using it for its intended purpose are protected from unreasonable risk of foreseeable harm. Then, there is deliberate design to keep young users online despite internal evidence that such use can cause emotional and psychological harm. This internal knowledge satisfies a key element that the companies should have taken steps to remedy the situation. Tort common law requires that a company such as Meta remedy the situation upon learning of such damages to users. However, it is clear that no appropriate steps were taken. The lawsuits also allege that Meta violated its obligations under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) by unlawfully collecting the personal data of its youngest users without parents’ consent
Youth Mental Health Implications
These upcoming trials will explore the relationship between social media and the mental health of children. Because social media is still so new, we are still learning about it. But the reality is that, with about 7 million years of evolution, for something so powerful to be so present is shocking to us. Thus, it is no wonder that the outcome of social media and addiction is so tragic. Research cited in the litigation points to rising rates of anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation among teens who spend hours daily on social platforms. The allegation here is that Meta has known about these implications and chosen to ignore them. One common issue is that youth and even adults will compare the likes or number of comments on their posts with those of their friends. If they receive fewer likes or fewer comments, they will feel inferior and may experience depression.
If they are adolescent girls, they may look at their skinnier friend and believe they are too heavy to get as many likes. The result is that the girl who receives fewer likes develops an eating disorder. Worse, the algorithm may feed into that, showing the girl videos of popular women who are also skinny. Girls can feel pressure to conform to unrealistic standards to receive attention. On top of eating disorders, they may experience sleep deprivation, academic decline, and worsening mental health. The most compelling argument here is that much of this is shown through Meta’s own internal records. The only reason we know this is because of a whistleblower within Meta.
Evidence Supporting the Claims
Over the 2023-2024 academic year, Meta surveyed 1,149 teenagers. They asked the teenagers whether and how often they felt bad about their bodies after using Instagram specifically. 19.4% of the teenagers who often felt bad about their bodies after viewing Instagram “eating disorder adjacent content” made up 10% of what they say on the platform. Meanwhile, the other 81% or so of the teenagers only saw such content about 3.3% of the time. Accordingly, there is a strong correlation between seeing the content on their feed and feeling bad about themselves after viewing the content on Instagram. In other words, teenagers who report feeling bad about their bodies after viewing posts on Instagram saw about three times more body-focused content than other teenagers. Importantly, the study states, “Do not distribute internally or externally without permission.” Meta’s initial reaction to this arguably adds fuel to the fire.
Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said the document demonstrates Meta’s commitment to understanding and improving its products. However, there are no discernible differences in content or how adolescents feel after using Instagram since that report is public. In the same study by Meta, it is clear that the existing screening tools, intended to detect violations of Instagram’s rules and policies, are incapable of detecting 98.5% of the sensitive content that Meta considers inappropriate for teenagers.
Defenses Available to the Platforms
Under 47 U.S.C. § 230, Meta will likely argue that it is immune. Focusing on § 230(c)(1), Treatment of Publisher or Speaker, the rule holds that “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” In (c)(2) on Civil Liability, the rule holds that no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of … any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material…
Timeline and What Comes Next
This litigation process for In re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation (MDL 3047) has been unfolding for the last three years, since October 2022. Of course, there has been extensive discovery given the volume of internal documentation at Meta. There have also been depositions of key executives at Meta and other platforms. Then, when the trial happens in January 2026 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Mark Zuckerberg will testify in open court. Although we do not yet know whether cameras will be allowed in the courtroom. What we do know is that reporters will be outside the courthouse if they cannot record the trial as it unfolds. The trial that happens in January will be a bellwether. This means it is not a class-action lawsuit. Rather, this trial sets the precedent for the other cases.
A bellwether case is like a test case. Accordingly, the best litigators on each side will be there to make their case. If the plaintiff in that case is successful, then there will be precedent for other judges to rely on, and settlements may pour in for other claimants. Meanwhile, if there is a defense verdict, the claimants’ road to recovering compensation will be far more challenging, though not impossible.
