Opening statements in the federal civil trial against Meta occurred this week in Oakland. A coalition of states argues the company prioritized profit over the mental health of young users while misleading the public about these internal risks. Lawyers representing the states contend that Meta designed its platforms with features intended to increase time spent on the apps, despite knowing these features could harm minors.
California Deputy Attorney General Megan O'Neill presented the plaintiffs' argument, describing a strategy to capture and hold younger users while hiding the negative impacts. The lawsuit alleges Meta violated consumer protection laws and the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act by gathering data from users under the age of 13. The states seek significant monetary relief and changes to the company's business practices.
Meta counsel Paul Schmidt defended the company by stating that the current legal framework does not require age verification on its platforms. He argued that the states are relying on selective statements to support their case and that the company makes efforts to pause data collection on accounts flagged as potentially underage. Schmidt also characterized the massive financial penalties requested by the states as a cash grab.
Former Meta employee Arturo Bejar provided initial testimony as the first witness for the plaintiffs. He claimed the company ignored internal warnings regarding user harm and reduced the influence of teams tasked with improving platform safety. Bejar alleged that Meta chose to remain unaware of the extent of issues to avoid taking corrective action.
Legal observers noted that the case hinges on whether the states can prove Meta knowingly ignored information about the negative effects of its products. The trial, held at the Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building, is expected to continue through September.