NEW YORK   –  Opening arguments kicked off Tuesday in what could be Meta’s most consequential legal fight yet over youth safety and addiction. If Meta loses the case, it could fundamentally change how the company’s social media platforms operate. The case was brought in 2023 by a group of 29 state attorneys general who allege that Meta intentionally designed its platforms to get young people addicted, boosting its business and harming mental health of children and teens in their states. They also claim that Meta misled the public about the risks of its platforms, and that it collected children’s data in violation of the federal Children Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). The trial that began this week in federal court in Oakland will hear arguments from lawyers for four of those states: California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey. In opening statements, Megan O’Neill, a deputy attorney general for the California Department of Justice, laid out the states’ argument alleging that Meta’s business relies on exploiting young people’s data and attention, and that it lied about known risks to teens’ mental health. Meta denies the allegations. She also said the states plan to seek testimony from Meta executives including CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Meta faces thousands of lawsuits claiming that it has addicted and harmed young people — as do Snap, TikTok and YouTube — and has already lost two such cases, putting it on the hook for just shy of $1 billion in damages. But the damages in Tuesday’s case could be orders of magnitude higher: the four states collectively seek as much as $1.4 trillion in damages. That proposed financial penalty is nearly as much as Meta’s total valuation on Wall Street. Even if the court awards smaller damages, the states also seek an order to change how Meta’s platforms operate.  “Meta designed a dangerous product for young users, knew it to be dangerous, and then lied to children, families, and the community about how dangerous it was,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement last week. “We are ready to hold Meta accountable for its role in fueling the mental health crisis of American children and look forward to trial.” Meta has called the allegations “unsubstantiated” and the massive proposed financial penalty “vastly disproportionate” to the claims. “The AGs offer no proof anyone in their states was misled, claim benign features like having an additional Instagram account somehow harmed their residents, and attempt to penalize Meta for industry-wide challenges like age verification,” a Meta spokesperson said in a statement Monday. “Rather than sticking to the facts or the law, the states have instead decided to chase an outlandish payout.” In opening statements, O’Neill outlined the states’ claims that Meta’s ad-based business model relies on harvesting young people’s data and building features to hook them to maximize the amount of time they spend on its platforms. The states claim that Meta designed features such as recommendation algorithms, infinitely scrolling feeds, “likes” and notifications to be intentionally addictive, according to the complaint.

Meta had deep knowledge of those risks, but repeatedly and falsely told lawmakers and the public that its platforms were safe for young people, O’Neill said on Tuesday. The states also claim Meta is aware that it has collected personal data from users under 13 without parental consent, in violation of COPPA. “Meta needed kids, and it needed to reassure the people who cared about them that their kids were safe,” O’Neill said during opening statements. So Meta “told the media, it told Congress, it told its users, it told parents, that Instagram and Facebook were safe for kids, that it prioritized kids’ safety and well-being,” despite having research that showed kids frequently have “bad, even traumatic experiences” on its platforms.

She cited an internal Meta document that she said is called, “the young ones are the best ones,” referring to the company’s efforts to attract young users.