Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Meta Platforms, is preparing to testify in a closely watched Los Angeles trial that is scrutinizing the impact of social media on young people. The case focuses on allegations that platforms such as Instagram were intentionally designed to keep children and teenagers engaged for long periods, potentially worsening mental health problems.
Zuckerberg’s court appearance is considered one of the most significant moments of the trial so far. Proceedings are not being livestreamed, meaning public access is limited to those physically present in the courtroom and to official legal records. Even so, the case has drawn national attention because of its potential to influence how courts and regulators treat social media companies.
At the center of the dispute is a major legal question: should social media platforms be treated as products that can be considered defective if they are found to exploit the psychological vulnerabilities of young users? The answer could carry major consequences for the technology industry.
Defense Argues Mental Health Issues Have Multiple Causes
Attorneys representing the technology companies reject the claim that their platforms are directly responsible for mental health struggles among teenagers. They argue that emotional and psychological challenges faced by young people stem from a wide range of social and personal factors. According to the defense, blaming social media alone oversimplifies a complex public health issue.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs take a different view. They argue that internal corporate materials show companies prioritized maximizing user engagement, especially among minors. The lawsuit highlights features such as endless scrolling feeds, autoplay videos, public approval metrics like “likes,” image filters and frequent push notifications. These design elements, the plaintiffs contend, make it difficult for young users to disengage from apps.
The plaintiffs’ legal team maintains that these features were not accidental but part of a deliberate strategy to hold users’ attention and encourage repeated use, particularly among children and teenagers.
Plaintiff’s Experience Anchors the Lawsuit
The case centers on a 20-year-old California woman identified in court documents as KGM, also referred to as Kaley. She alleges that she began using YouTube heavily at a very young age and later became a regular user of Instagram during childhood. According to her complaint, extended time on these platforms contributed to worsening depression and suicidal thoughts.
Jurors are expected to hear detailed testimony from Kaley as the trial continues. Her experience is presented by the plaintiffs as an example of how early and prolonged exposure to social media could affect developing brains. The case is widely viewed as a bellwether for approximately 1,600 related lawsuits filed by families and school districts. Many of those cases have been consolidated and are awaiting the outcome of this trial, which legal observers say may guide future litigation against major technology companies.
Separate Legal Battle Unfolds in New Mexico
At the same time that the Los Angeles proceedings are underway, Meta is facing another legal challenge in New Mexico. In that case, the state’s attorney general has brought a consumer protection lawsuit accusing the company of failing to adequately protect children from sexual exploitation on its platforms. It is not yet clear whether Zuckerberg will testify in that separate trial.
In the California courtroom, the jury must reach a three-fourths majority — nine of twelve jurors — to deliver a verdict. A ruling in favor of the plaintiff could result in substantial financial damages and potentially force changes to how social media platforms design their products. Legal analysts say such an outcome might also encourage settlement discussions in many of the pending related cases.
Plaintiffs Challenge Longstanding Legal Protections
For decades, technology companies have relied on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1996 law that generally shields online platforms from liability for content posted by users. In this case, the plaintiffs are pursuing a different legal strategy. Rather than focusing on user-generated content, they are arguing under product liability law that the platforms themselves are flawed by design.
Kaley’s original lawsuit named Meta, Google, TikTok and Snap as defendants. The complaint alleges that these companies used engagement strategies similar to those once employed by tobacco companies to attract young consumers, despite internal research suggesting possible risks to teenagers.
TikTok and Snap settled their portions of the case before the trial began, leaving Meta and Google as the remaining defendants contesting the allegations in court.
Families Call for Greater Accountability
The trial has drawn families from across the United States who say their children experienced severe harm connected to social media use. Many parents have attended hearings carrying photographs of children they lost, turning the courtroom into an emotional setting.
One of the parents attending is Julianna Arnold, whose teenage daughter died after interacting with an online predator she encountered through social media. Arnold and other families say they hope the trial will increase public awareness about online risks and lead to stronger safeguards for children.
These parents are advocating for clearer rules and stronger oversight of social media companies. They argue that platforms widely used by minors should operate with stricter protections to reduce the risk of harm.
