The latest kids online safety trial against Meta kicked off Wednesday in a California federal court, where the technology giant is accused of designing its platforms to be addictive for young users.
Jury selection began Wednesday morning in the U.S. District Court in Oakland, Calif., for the case, which consolidates lawsuits from attorneys general across the country.
The lawsuit, filed in 2023, alleges the Facebook and Instagram parent company designed and implemented harmful features that encourage “excessive use” in teens and younger children. It also accuses Meta of misleading the public about the mental and physical health risks and routinely collecting the data of users younger than 13 without parental consent.
“Meta has harnessed powerful and unprecedented technologies to entice, engage and ultimately ensnare youth and teens,” the complaint stated.
“It has concealed the ways in which these platforms exploit and manipulate its most vulnerable consumers: teenagers and children. And it has ignored the sweeping damage these platforms have caused to the mental and physical health of our nation’s youth,” it added.
The complaint was originally filed by 29 states, but this month’s trial will only cover the first four from California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey.
“We strongly disagree with these allegations and are confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people,” a spokesperson for Meta told The Hill Wednesday.
“We’ve listened to parents, worked with experts and law enforcement, and conducted in-depth research to understand the issues that matter most. We’re proud of the progress we’ve made, and we’re always working to do better,” they added.
An appeals court denied Meta’s request to dismiss the case on Monday.
Separately, the court declined to drop the thousands of other online safety lawsuits against social media firms, ruling Meta and TikTok appealed the cases too early.
In an opinion issued Monday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined the technology liability shield — Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act — cannot be used by social media firms to dismiss lawsuits but only as a defense against claims.
Section 230, which protects technology companies from being held legally liable for third-party or user content, has largely shielded several firms from lawsuits related to content posted on their platforms.
But the statute did not protect Meta in federal court earlier this year in California when a federal jury determined in March the company and YouTube were negligent in their design or operation of the platforms.
The companies were ordered to pay a combined $6 million.
The case, brought by a 20-year-old named K.G.M., consolidated thousands of lawsuits brought by individuals, school districts and states against multiple social media companies. Lawyers said K.G.M. became addicted to the platforms — prompting or worsening mental health issues.
Legal experts told The Hill at the time the case’s targeting of platform design rather than the content posted to social media makes it easier for lawyers to get around Section 230 and other free speech arguments that typically arise with online content.
The trial comes just days after a New Mexico court ordered Meta to pay an additional $567 million in the second phase of a state social media safety case.
The order added to the $375 million in civil penalties Meta was ordered to pay in the first phase of the trial after a jury found the technology giant violated New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act. The law prohibits unfair, deceptive and misleading business ventures across the state.
Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
