Four US States Demand $1.4 Trillion from Meta Over Claims It Addicted Children to Instagram and Facebook

Four US states have set out demands for penalties amounting to around $1.4 trillion (£1.05 trillion) from Meta over claims that Instagram and Facebook were engineered to addict young users and that the company misled the public on the safety of its platforms. The figure emerged in a Meta court filing this month ahead of an August trial in Oakland, California.

It is comparable to the company's market value of about $1.5 trillion (£1.12 trillion). The states are California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey. Their penalty calculations remain sealed but were outlined in a June hearing.

The Penalty Demand And Its Context

The August trial before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will hear the four states' consumer protection claims alongside those from 29 other states under the federal Children's Online Privacy Protection Act regarding data collection from children without parental consent. Another 14 states face a separate February trial on their own state law claims.

Details of how the four states arrived at their penalty figure are sealed, but the method involves estimating the number of young users harmed and applying maximum per-violation fines from state law.

The resulting demand is striking in its size. Meta has described such a sanction as having no precedent in consumer protection enforcement history. The company faces thousands of claims across federal and state courts over allegations of addictive design contributing to a youth mental health crisis.

Allegations Central To The Case

The states allege that Meta designed features in its platforms to maximise engagement among younger audiences, prioritising growth over user well-being. They claim the company was aware of the addictive nature of the services yet made public statements that downplayed the risks to children and teens.

In June the presiding judge rejected Meta's bid to dismiss the case, determining that key factual questions remained unresolved. These cover whether the platforms were addictive, whether Meta falsely represented their design, and whether it targeted children to any degree.

The allegations form part of broader concerns about social media's impact on young people. A spokesperson for California's attorney general has said the lawsuit alleges Meta has prioritised profits over the safety of kids and fuelled the mental health crisis impacting a generation of American children. The state looks forward to holding the company accountable at trial.

Meta's Stance And Wider Litigation

Meta has stated that the proposed penalties 'is not supported by evidence' and that 'the plaintiffs' outlandish calculations have no basis in fact or law'. It has further argued that 'a sanction of that size has no analog in the history of consumer protection enforcement'.

The company maintains that social media addiction is not an established psychiatric condition, rendering any denial of addictiveness incapable of being false. Meta points to its ongoing work on safety measures, including tools for parents and time management features.

The Oakland trial forms part of extensive litigation against the company and other platforms. In March a New Mexico jury awarded $375 million (£280 million) after finding Meta had misled consumers there about platform dangers. Thousands of additional cases are pending against Meta, Snapchat, YouTube and TikTok over claims of harmful design.

As preparations continue for the August proceedings, the case highlights ongoing scrutiny of how social media companies engage with younger users and the potential consequences for their business practices and regulatory environment.