Meta child safety trial: 29 states take the social media giant to court
Opening statements began on Tuesday in one of the most significant child safety lawsuits in social media history. Twenty-nine state attorneys general are now in federal court in Oakland, California, arguing that Meta knowingly designed its platforms to be addictive to children and then lied to the public about the risks. If the states win, Meta could face fines of up to $1.4 trillion.1
I am genuinely relieved to see this trial. I have always said that to see genuine change in social media platforms, it needs to hurt their profits, because child safety does not make them as much profit as a child addicted to their content.
This post will walk you through what is being alleged, what evidence is already public, what Meta will likely argue in its defence and what you as a parent or teacher should do with this information right now.
What Meta is accused of doing to children
The lawsuit, led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, alleges that Meta violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), California’s False Advertising Law, and California’s Unfair Competition Law.2 But the core accusation is simpler than the legal language, Meta built platforms designed to hook young users and keep them scrolling, knowing it would harm them and then told the public everything was fine.
If a parent asked me to explain this in plain terms, I would put it like this, this is what doomscrolling is all about. The technique was invented to engage people in the habit of thinking “just one more,” and it keeps them on the app, generating profit for the platform. That is why ByteDance, the owner of TikTok, were forced to create a safe version for Chinese children. One of the features of that version is a break between each video to prevent doomscrolling. That is not profitable, and they were only forced to do it in China, so the rest of the world gets the addictive version.
Meta’s platforms use the same mechanics. The allegation is that this was not an accident or an unintended side effect, it was the business model.
The evidence that already exists
The attorneys general are not building this case from scratch. Internal Meta research, leaked by whistleblowers and reported extensively since 2021, showed that the company knew Instagram was harmful to teenage mental health, particularly for girls.3 The Frances Haugen disclosures revealed internal documents where Meta’s own researchers flagged the damage their products were causing.
From my perspective, the evidence already exists from internal research conducted by Meta themselves. The fact that they did not act on that research to make the platform safe speaks volumes. Whistleblowers are also giving evidence from internal viewpoints. A business decision was made over a safety decision at every turn, because that is where the profit lies.
This is not speculation. This is Meta’s own data, now being presented in court.
What Meta will argue in its defence
Meta’s defence will almost certainly argue that parents have the tools to control their children’s usage and that the company cannot be held responsible for how people choose to use a free platform.
I think it is a disgrace that they attract children to their platforms and then expect parents, who will each have different levels of technical capability, to be responsible for the safety of their children on a platform they probably do not fully understand. Not only that, but do we build motorways and then expect the drivers of vehicles to build crash barriers and lighting to make them safe?
The “parental responsibility” argument puts the burden on families while the company profits from the very behaviours it enabled. It is a deflection, not a defence.
⚡Please don’t forget to react & restack if you appreciate my work. More engagement means more people might see it. ⚡
The lawsuits that came before this trial
This trial did not happen in isolation. It follows a pattern of courts finding against Meta in child safety cases.
In March 2026, a Los Angeles jury found Meta liable for a young woman’s mental health harm and awarded $6 million in damages in the case of K.G.M. v. Meta.4 That verdict established that a jury could hold Meta accountable for the design of its platform, not just for hosting harmful content.
More significantly, a New Mexico judge ordered Meta to pay $567 million after a jury found the company failed to protect young users from child sexual exploitation.5 That case dealt directly with predatory behaviour facilitated by Meta’s platforms.
These are not outliers. There are approximately 1,600 plaintiffs in California alone, over 10,000 individual lawsuits nationwide, and nearly 800 school district cases pending against Meta.6 The Oakland trial is just the tip of an iceberg.
Why this trial matters more than the others
The state attorneys general trial is different because of scale and consequence. Twenty-nine states acting together, with California’s Attorney General leading, represents a coordinated government action rather than individual claims. The potential $1.4 trillion in fines is not a typo. That figure reflects the statutory penalties available under the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and state consumer protection laws, multiplied across millions of affected users.
If the states prevail, it will not just hurt Meta financially. It will establish legal precedent that platforms can be held liable for designing addictive features aimed at children. Every other social media company will have to reckon with that precedent.
What parents should do right now
For a parent reading this today, not a lawyer, just someone trying to keep their child safe, here is what I want you to actually do with this information.
Understand that platforms do not have the safety of your child as their priority. They will only implement the very bare minimum of controls that they are mandated to. You, first and foremost, have the most effective parental control, ensuring a safe and non-judgemental space for your child so that when something feels dodgy, they can come and speak to you without fear of punishment or having their phone taken away.
If a child starts to hide things, that is what a sexual predator thrives on. Secrecy.
The conversation you have at your kitchen table matters more than any setting you can toggle in an app. Technical controls are useful, but they are not a substitute for trust.
Where this goes from here
The Oakland trial is expected to last up to six weeks. We will not have a verdict tomorrow. But the fact that opening statements are happening, that evidence is being presented, that Meta executives will have to answer questions under oath, is the pressure that is needed for real change to happen.
I spent 8 years inside the evidence. I analysed in excess of a million images, approximately a quarter of which were criminal across all levels of grading scales. I had no counselling or therapy support during that work. I was diagnosed with Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and medically discharged from the Royal Air Force in 2019.
I do not create this content for financial gain. 100% of paid subscription income goes to Childline every six months. I create it because if I can stop even one child from becoming evidence in a criminal case, the pain is worth it.
This trial is a step toward accountability. It is not the finish line, but it is movement in the right direction.
Keep fighting the good fight, stay up-to-date, and keep the conversations alive and kicking. You are not alone in this.
As always, thank you for your support. Please share this across your social media, and if you do have any comments, questions, or concerns, then feel free to reach out to me via the Social page, as I am always happy to spend some time helping to protect children online.
Remember that becoming a paid subscriber means supporting a charity very close to my heart and helping it do amazing things for people. Childline, I will donate 100% of paid subscriptions collected every six months, as I don’t do any of this for financial gain. Or to make a one-off donation, go to my Just Giving page.
If you or a child you know needs support:
Childline: 0800 1111 | childline.org.uk
Available 24/7, 365 days a year. Free, confidential, and here for every child.
Opening statements in state attorneys general v. Meta trial, Oakland, California, August 18, 2026. Potential fines of up to $1.4 trillion reported in court filings. Accessed August 2026.
Allegations include violations of COPPA, California False Advertising Law, and California Unfair Competition Law per complaint filed by California AG Rob Bonta. Accessed August 2026.
Internal Meta research on Instagram’s harm to teenage mental health disclosed by Frances Haugen, reported by The Wall Street Journal, September 2021. Accessed August 2026.
K.G.M. v. Meta verdict, Los Angeles, March 2026. $6 million awarded. Accessed August 2026.
New Mexico v. Meta verdict, $567 million ordered for failure to protect young users from child sexual exploitation. Accessed August 2026.
Approximately 1,600 plaintiffs in California, over 10,000 individual lawsuits nationwide, and nearly 800 school district cases pending. Figures reported August 2026. Accessed August 2026.