Outlook Explains | Did Meta Design Instagram To Hook Children? What The US Trial Is Really About

Meta is facing one of its biggest legal challenges over the impact of social media on children, with 29 US states accusing the company of deliberately designing Facebook and Instagram to keep young users engaged while downplaying potential risks.

The federal trial, which began in Oakland, California, could go beyond financial penalties. The states are also seeking changes to features central to social media, including infinite scroll, likes, notifications and recommendation algorithms, Reuters reported.

Meta denies deliberately making its platforms addictive and says there is no clear evidence that social media use itself causes poor mental health among adolescents.

What Are The Accusations?

California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey are leading consumer protection claims alleging that Meta knowingly designed Facebook and Instagram in ways that encouraged children and teenagers to spend more time on the platforms, Reuters reported.

All 29 states have also accused Meta of improperly collecting and using personal information belonging to children under 13, allegedly violating the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA.

California Deputy Attorney General Megan O'Neill told jurors that Meta's model was to “hook the users, hold them for as long as they can, harvest their data, and then hide the truth from the public”, Reuters reported.

“It worked especially well for kids,” she added.

The states argue that Meta knew younger users could be vulnerable to compulsive use but continued prioritising engagement while reassuring parents about safety.

Did Meta Deliberately Make Instagram Addictive?

The states say Meta intentionally built features aimed at maximising engagement among teenagers. Meta rejects the claim that an engaging platform is necessarily an addictive one.

Meta lawyer Paul Schmidt told jurors there was “no dispute” that some social media users face difficulties, but said research does not establish a clear connection between adolescent social media use and declining wellbeing, according to Reuters.

“They don't believe they're going to do well if people don't like their service,” Schmidt said of Meta's executives.

The states will therefore have to show more than heavy Instagram use among teenagers. They must demonstrate that Meta knowingly designed or deployed features in ways that were harmful, deceptive or unlawful.

What Do Internal Meta Documents Allegedly Show?

O'Neill told jurors that an internal email sent to Instagram chief Adam Mosseri referred to “teen time spent” as a goal. She also said employees had described Instagram as a “drug” and themselves as “pushers”, Reuters reported.

“Meta found the younger a kid is when they start using the app, the better,” O'Neill told the jury.

The BBC has also reported that internal Meta research cited in the litigation linked social comparison on Instagram with “increased loneliness, worse body image, and negative mood or affect”.

Meta disputes the states' interpretation. Schmidt said employees sometimes used “loose” language privately and argued that isolated phrases do not prove that the company intended to create an addictive service.

Former Meta safety engineer Arturo Bejar, the states' first witness, told jurors that the company had taken a “don't ask, don't tell” approach towards children under 13 using its services.

“Many products were shipped into the world,” including Reels, he said, “and safety was not a consideration in how it was initially deployed,” according to Reuters.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Mosseri are also expected to testify.

Infinite Scroll, Notifications And Recommendations Under Scrutiny

The lawsuit focuses not only on harmful content, but also on how Instagram keeps users engaged.

Infinite scroll removes a natural stopping point. Autoplay starts another video automatically. Notifications encourage users to reopen the app, while recommendation algorithms continually serve content based on previous behaviour.

The states argue that, taken together, such features can prolong use and are particularly concerning when applied to children.

According to the BBC, the states are seeking changes including parental verification, limits on autoplay, restrictions on appearance-changing filters, changes to recommendation algorithms and restrictions on multiple accounts.

Reuters reported that the lead states also want restrictions on infinite scroll and likes for younger users, time limits and stronger enforcement to keep children under 13 off Meta's platforms.

What Does Meta Say In Its Defence?

Meta says the states are oversimplifying the relationship between social media and adolescent mental health.

“We strongly disagree with these allegations and are confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people,” a Meta spokesperson said in a statement cited by the BBC.

The company points to safeguards including Instagram Teen Accounts, introduced in 2024. According to Meta, younger users are automatically placed under stricter settings limiting who can contact them and what sensitive material can be recommended.

Meta has also introduced overnight notification restrictions, reminders after prolonged Instagram use, parental supervision tools and additional age-assurance measures.

Its broader argument is that internal discussions about risk demonstrate efforts to identify and address problems, rather than an attempt to conceal them.

What Happened To Meta's Attempts To Dismiss The Case?

Meta has repeatedly tried to prevent major parts of the lawsuit from reaching trial.

In October 2024, US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected much of Meta's attempt to dismiss the states' claims, Reuters reported.

Meta had argued, among other things, that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protected it from liability. The states, however, are largely targeting Meta's own platform design and business practices rather than content uploaded by users.

In June 2026, Gonzalez Rogers also denied Meta's motion for summary judgment, ruling that key factual disputes needed to be decided at trial.

Earlier this month, the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an attempt involving Meta and TikTok to immediately appeal Section 230 rulings and declined to postpone Meta's trial, according to Reuters.

None of these rulings establish that Meta deliberately addicted children. They mean the allegations can now be tested before the court.

What If Meta Loses?

Meta has said potential statutory penalties under the states' theory could reach $1.4 trillion, although Gonzalez Rogers has described that estimate as unreasonable, Reuters reported.

Attorneys general have suggested a figure closer to $200 billion.

More significantly, the court could order Meta to change how Instagram and Facebook work for younger users.

The jury's verdict will be advisory, with Gonzalez Rogers ultimately determining liability and any remedies.

The case comes amid wider legal pressure on social media companies. In March, a Los Angeles jury ordered Meta and Google to pay $6 million to a woman who said she became addicted to Instagram and YouTube as a child. Meta has also faced major penalties in New Mexico over youth safety.