Meta is defending itself in a federal civil trial in Oakland, California, where 29 state attorneys general claim the company violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA, by collecting personal data from children under 13 without parental consent. The lead plaintiffs from California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey also allege Meta made deceptive statements about its platforms, Facebook and Instagram, that misled consumers. Meta denies the COPPA violations and deceptive claims, and asserts it is shielded by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which generally protects platforms from liability for user-generated content.
Chief District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers is presiding over the case, and opening arguments began Tuesday. California Deputy Attorney General Megan O’Neill told the jury that Meta designed features to draw children in and keep them returning, harvesting their data in the process. Meta’s lead attorney, Paul Schmidt, countered by describing numerous safety features built into the apps over the years, while noting that some teens struggle to manage time on the platforms and that users post negative content.
Former Meta employee Arturo Bejar testified that during his tenure, company culture prioritized growth over youth safety, allowing feature ideas that spur growth to be tested freely. He also described an environment where screening products for potential harms was nearly impossible. Meta has faced many scandals over the past decade, including roles in stoking violence, swaying elections, and opaque data collection, yet its AI-driven features have kept users engaged and ad revenue flowing.
This trial follows a landmark California case this spring where a jury found Meta and YouTube liable for harming a young user through app design features. Earlier this month, Meta was ordered to pay over $940 million in New Mexico for causing psychological harm to children and being a public nuisance. Other social media companies, including Snap, TikTok, and YouTube, have chosen to settle similar child safety suits this year, while Meta opted for trial and suffered public losses.
The state attorneys general are seeking approximately $200 billion in damages, and a ruling against Meta could force changes to core platform features. These potential changes include stricter age-gating, enforcement of time limits, eliminating likes and endless scroll for younger users, and increased algorithmic transparency. Jurors in the case reportedly use Facebook mainly for Marketplace but actively use Instagram, and many expressed concerns about their own or their children’s usage, with some expecting parents to share oversight responsibility.
The outcome could hold Meta accountable not for the content on its platforms but for how that content is delivered to younger users, potentially altering its growth-focused approach and algorithmic design. Whether such a ruling would change usage habits for already-hooked users remains unproven, but the trial’s evidence could shape how younger generations experience these apps.
More technology news from TechManNews.
