Meta Faces High-Stakes Trials Over Alleged Failures to Protect Children

Meta is confronting a concentrated period of legal and congressional scrutiny as a criminal or civil action by New Mexico prosecutors and a bellwether civil trial in Los Angeles (with related federal claims in Northern California) put product design, internal research and governance practices at issue. Plaintiffs in California are focusing on a narrow set of representative cases to show that features such as continuous playback, endlessly refreshed feeds and recommendation engines were intentionally engineered to maximize youth engagement and contributed to mental‑health harms; they plan to use thousands of internal documents and testimony from behavioral‑science experts. New Mexico prosecutors similarly allege that design choices across Meta’s apps enabled dangerous contact between minors and bad actors. Filings made public in recent court proceedings prompted a bipartisan group of U.S. senators to demand documents and explanations after the records indicated that safety changes for teens had been discussed internally well before Meta rolled out private‑by‑default settings for teen Instagram accounts in September 2024. Lawmakers want to know who influenced timing decisions, what metrics guided interventions, and whether internal enforcement thresholds delayed fixes. Court schedules anticipate extended jury selection and several weeks of testimony; both sides are preparing dense factual and scientific records and senior product leaders and executives could be called to testify. Defendants warn that disclosure of internal research could be commercially consequential, while legal observers note that bench remedies are more likely to be financial awards though judges retain authority to order targeted interface or feature changes if unlawful conduct is found. The litigation functions as a potential bellwether for dozens of related suits and regulatory actions pending in state and federal courts; a plaintiff victory that convinces jurors of intentional harmful design could narrow platforms’ practical defenses and spur settlements, statutory reforms or product redesigns. International regulatory shifts — from stricter youth access limits in Europe to large‑scale account removals in other jurisdictions — are raising the stakes for Meta’s global compliance and design choices. Regardless of verdicts, the public airing of internal documents and expert debate is likely to intensify reputational scrutiny, heighten regulatory interest, and influence investor assessments of long‑term legal and business risk for attention‑driven platforms.