In a recent court filing, Meta Platforms disclosed that state attorneys general are pursuing up to $1.4 trillion in penalties ahead of a trial concerning allegations that the company engineered its social media platforms, Facebook and Instagram, to be habit-forming for adolescents. This considerable figure is nearly equivalent to Meta’s total market capitalization, currently valued at approximately $1.48 trillion. The litigation, known as In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Product Liability Litigation, is a multidistrict case brought together in the Northern District of California.
More than 40 state attorneys general have initiated legal actions against Meta and other social media companies, asserting that these firms intentionally embedded addictive elements into their platforms while concealing the risks from young users. In May, a settlement was reached with a Kentucky school district, where Meta agreed to a $9 million payment as part of a wider $27 million settlement, shared among Meta and three other firms.
The approaching trial in August is set to examine consumer protection allegations from California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey, alongside federal claims from 29 other states under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule (COPPA). Meta’s filing on Monday emphasizes that the $1.4 trillion sought reflects the calculation of consumer protection violations per individual user.
Meta is contesting this calculation, arguing that each state’s consumer protection laws mandate linking penalties to a specific wrongful act. The company asserts that the attorneys general arrived at their figures by applying maximum fines to each eligible teen user, regardless of whether those users were actually affected by the contested product features. Meta also alleges that the proposed remedies from the states include duplicative calculations and conflict with the states’ expert witness testimony.
Additionally, Meta raises constitutional issues, referencing legal precedent that suggests penalties which are grossly disproportionate to the offense in question are unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause. The company stresses that no precedent exists for penalties of this magnitude in unfair practice or COPPA violation cases, drawing comparisons to historical settlements such as the 2006 Master Settlement Agreement with tobacco companies, which was significantly lower at $206 billion. Meta has requested that the court eliminate certain penalty calculations prior to trial, delegate the decision of monetary relief to the court instead of a jury, and restrict any mention of precise monetary amounts to the jury during the trial’s liability phase.
As the company navigates these challenges, it faces ongoing scrutiny and legal actions on multiple fronts. In March, Meta and YouTube were found liable in California for negligence related to the design of harmful products, and a New Mexico jury found Meta responsible for endangering children and providing misleading information about platform safety. Further afield, Austria’s Supreme Court ruled last December that Meta’s personalized advertising approach breached European Union data protection laws.