A federal judge has ruled in favor of a multistate coalition suing Meta, clearing the way for key evidence and testimony in a landmark child-safety trial set to begin Tuesday in Oakland, California. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers issued an order Sunday allowing the states to call whistleblower Arturo Béjar as a witness and to present select evidence during opening statements, despite Meta’s objections.
The trial, brought by attorneys general from California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey, marks the first of dozens of lawsuits alleging Meta’s platforms—Facebook and Instagram—were designed to addict young users and violated child privacy laws. The states seek financial damages and operational changes, with potential claims totaling $1.4 trillion, a figure Meta disputes as excessive.
Meta’s legal challenges rejected
Judge Gonzalez Rogers rejected Meta’s attempts to block Béjar’s testimony and preemptively introduce evidence, calling the company’s arguments a “Hail Mary” effort. The judge ruled that the whistleblower’s inclusion and early evidence presentation do not violate legal standards, despite Meta’s claims of procedural irregularities. The company had argued that Béjar’s Signal chats with insiders auto-deleted in defiance of document retention orders, raising admissibility concerns.
Core allegations and Meta’s response
The lawsuit alleges Meta knowingly designed features—such as infinite scroll, autoplay, and likes—to maximize time spent by young users, contributing to mental health harms including anxiety, depression, and suicide. It also claims Meta collected data from children under 13 without parental consent, violating the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). The states further allege Meta misled the public about the safety of its platforms.
Meta has denied all allegations, stating in a legal filing that the states’ claims are “unsubstantiated” and that the financial demands are “vastly disproportionate.” The company asserts it has collaborated with experts, parents, and law enforcement to address youth safety concerns and disputes the methodology behind the alleged harms. Meta also notes that the $1.4 trillion figure—nearly equal to its market capitalization—is based on a legal filing and not a final demand.
Trial details and potential witnesses
The trial, presiding over U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, is expected to include testimony from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram CEO Adam Mosseri, though neither has been confirmed as witnesses at this time. The case is seen as a bellwether for the remaining 25 states’ lawsuits, which are scheduled for later proceedings.
Meta reported a profit decline last month, attributing part of the downturn to $2.4 billion in legal expenses related to child-safety litigation. The company has previously lost two pivotal cases this year involving harms to children and teens, further raising the stakes of this trial.
Legal and policy implications
The outcome of this trial could set precedents for how social media platforms are regulated, particularly regarding algorithmic design, data collection, and youth mental health. Legal experts note that rulings on evidence admissibility and witness credibility may influence future cases, including those involving other tech giants. The case also intersects with ongoing debates over Section 230 protections and whether platforms can be held liable for user-generated content.
Background: The multistate lawsuit
Filed in 2023, the lawsuit consolidates claims from 29 states, with the current trial involving four. The coalition argues that Meta’s profit-driven design choices prioritized engagement over safety, leading to measurable harm among young users. The states seek both monetary damages and structural changes to Meta’s platforms, including modifications to core features.
Meta has countered that the lawsuit overstates the evidence and that its platforms include safeguards, such as age verification tools and parental controls. The company also disputes the scientific consensus on the link between social media use and mental health harms, citing ongoing research debates.
What’s next
Opening statements are scheduled for Tuesday, with the trial expected to last several weeks. The judge’s rulings on evidence and witness testimony signal a pro-plaintiff procedural posture, though the ultimate outcome remains uncertain. Both sides have signaled willingness to appeal if the verdict does not favor their position.
For Meta, the trial represents a critical juncture in its legal and public relations strategy, as it faces thousands of lawsuits over child safety. For the states, the case is a test of whether courts will hold tech companies accountable for alleged harms to minors, potentially reshaping industry practices nationwide.