How much time does your child spend on Facebook or Instagram? An hour? Two hours? Or hours on end without even realizing it? This very question has now landed in a US courtroom. A coalition of 29 American states has filed a massive lawsuit against Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram. The core allegation: Meta deliberately designed its platforms to keep children and teenagers engaged on social media for as long as possible. Prosecutors further allege that the company was aware of children’s psychological vulnerabilities in advance and exploited them to boost engagement. This is no ordinary lawsuit — its outcome could shape the future of social media companies at large, which is why some experts are calling it a “Big Tobacco moment for the social media industry.” What exactly are the allegations against Meta? Why have 29 states stepped in? What is Meta’s defense? And why are plaintiffs demanding a staggering $200 billion in penalties? Here’s a detailed look.
Did Meta Deliberately Turn Children Into “Addicts”?
This is the central allegation under scrutiny in the case. The longer users stay on Meta’s platforms, the more engagement, data, and advertising value the company generates. The coalition of states alleges that Meta deliberately built features designed to keep users online for maximum time — and that this is especially dangerous for children and teenagers. At a young age, the desire for social approval runs high, while self-control has not yet fully developed. Children, the lawsuit argues, are quicker to respond to social rewards such as likes, comments, and notifications. Prosecutors contend that Meta was fully aware of all of this. The key question before the court, then, is: did the company understand child psychology — and exploit that very psychology to drive platform engagement?
During the proceedings, California’s government attorney Megan O’Neil leveled serious accusations, telling the court that Meta had researched how children’s brains function and discussed how to modify Instagram specifically to keep them on the platform longer. One particularly explosive detail cited by the prosecution was Meta’s internal research built around the notion that “young people are the best” — material she said would be presented as courtroom evidence. The prosecution also advanced the argument that, for Meta, children are not merely users but a core part of its business model.
Age Restrictions and Enforcement Gaps
Platforms like Facebook and Instagram typically place account restrictions on children under the age of 13. However, prosecutors allege that Meta was aware that children under 13 were using its platforms and failed to take adequate steps to remove them entirely. As an example, the prosecution cited a case where a user’s Facebook account was deactivated after being flagged as under 13 — while a linked Instagram account remained active. This raises the central courtroom question: did rules exist on paper while the company failed to enforce them in practice?
Meta, for its part, denies the allegations. Company attorney Paul Schmidt acknowledged that some users may have negative experiences on the platforms but said Meta has developed numerous safety tools to protect them. The company maintains that it works alongside parents, experts, and law enforcement agencies on child safety. In short:
Prosecution: “Meta exploited children’s vulnerabilities.”
Meta: “We have put safety tools in place.”
It is now up to the court to determine which claim holds true.
Former Engineering Director’s Testimony
Another notable development in the case is the testimony of Arturo Bejar, Meta’s former engineering director. He told the court that in Facebook’s early years, the priority was rolling out features to users as quickly as possible — with safety and protection, he argued, sometimes relegated to a secondary priority as a result. He also testified that he had previously raised concerns about user safety on social media. Meta attempted to block his testimony, but the court rejected that request, making his account a pivotal piece of evidence in the case.
Parents and Activists Protest
As the case unfolds in court, parents and activists have also staged protests outside it. Among the demonstrators were families alleging that their children suffered serious mental health issues as a result of excessive social media use. Some parents protested under the message that “Big Tech companies hold power — and that power must come with accountability.” The case, in other words, has evolved beyond a legal battle into a broader debate pitting parents against Big Tech.
Background and Demands
The lawsuit was first filed in 2023. The coalition of 29 states is now leveling several serious allegations against Meta, including that the company downplayed the risks its apps pose to children; designed engagement features to draw users back to its platforms repeatedly; collected data from children under 13 without appropriate parental consent; and left safety features such as screen-time controls easy to bypass. As a result, the states are demanding fundamental changes to Meta’s platforms.
The most sensational element of the case is the demand for a $200 billion penalty. Beyond the financial demand, the states are calling for screen-time limits for children, stronger safety measures, and tighter data protections on Facebook and Instagram — pressure that amounts to a demand to overhaul the company’s business model itself, not merely pay a fine.
A “Big Tobacco Moment”?
This is where the case takes on historical significance. In the 1990s, US states waged a similarly massive legal battle against tobacco companies, accusing them of withholding full information from the public about the health risks of smoking. Those cases eventually led to a landmark settlement in 1998, under which tobacco companies were required to pay enormous sums. Now, a similar question is being asked of Meta: did social media companies know in advance about the risks posed by their products? That parallel is why some legal experts are calling this a “Big Tobacco moment for social media.”
The Bigger Picture
Ultimately, this is not simply a lawsuit against Meta — it is a major legal battle touching on four critical issues: children’s mental health, social media addiction, data privacy, and Big Tech accountability. On one side stand 29 states arguing that Meta failed to protect children; on the other, Meta insists it has already introduced numerous safety tools. The real test now lies with the court. The verdict in this case may not affect Meta alone — it could set new rules for the entire social media industry, including Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok. That is what the world is watching closely, because while a smartphone may sit in a child’s hands, their future should not be left in the hands of an algorithm.