The trial against Meta opened on Monday in a U.S. federal court, with attorneys for a coalition of states arguing that the company deliberately engineered its platforms to exploit the psychological vulnerabilities of teenagers. The lawsuit, brought by dozens of states, claims that features such as infinite scroll, notifications, and algorithmic recommendation systems are designed to maximize time spent on the apps at the expense of minors' mental health.
In their opening statements, state lawyers presented evidence suggesting that Meta was aware of internal research showing the harmful effects of its products on young users, yet continued to prioritize engagement over safety. They asserted that the company's business model relies on keeping minors hooked, leading to increased rates of anxiety, depression, and body image issues among adolescents.
Meta's defense team countered by emphasizing the company's existing safety measures, including parental controls, age verification efforts, and partnerships with mental health organizations. They argued that the states' case overlooks the benefits of social connection and the responsibility of parents and caregivers in guiding children's online behavior. The company also contended that its platforms have evolved to address many of the concerns raised in the lawsuit.
This case is one of the most significant legal challenges to social media companies, potentially setting a precedent for how platform liability is determined in relation to youth mental health. The trial, which is expected to last several weeks, will include testimony from current and former Meta executives, as well as experts in psychology and technology.
While the proceedings take place in the United States, the outcome could reverberate globally, including in the Philippines, where Meta's platforms are widely used by young people. Local advocates have long called for stronger safeguards and more transparent policies from social media giants, making this trial a closely watched development across the region.