A Los Angeles jury has found Meta and Google liable for designing addictive platforms that harmed a young user’s mental health, in a landmark verdict that could reshape how tech giants defend growing safety claims.
The case centres on a now 20-year-old woman, known as Kaley, who sued over her childhood use of Instagram and YouTube.
Jurors ruled the companies intentionally built features that contributed to addiction, awarding roughly $4.5 million in damages, with Meta responsible for 70% and Google 30%.
The decision lands as pressure mounts globally on social platforms over their impact on children and teens, and as multiple similar cases line up in US courts.
A verdict that signals a shift
The jury found both companies negligent in the design of their platforms, particularly for failing to warn users about potential harms.
Kaley’s legal team argued the platforms operated as “addiction machines”, pointing to features like infinite scroll and algorithmic feeds that encouraged prolonged use.
“Today’s verdict is a referendum – from a jury, to an entire industry – that accountability has arrived,” the plaintiff’s lead counsel said.
Meta and Google both pushed back.
Meta said: “We respectfully disagree with the verdict and are evaluating our legal options.”
A Google spokesperson added: “We disagree with the verdict and plan to appeal. This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site.”
Plaintiff’s lawyer outside the court
Platform design under scrutiny
The case focused less on content and more on product design, a strategic shift that made it harder for the companies to deflect liability.
Kaley told the court she began using YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 9, with no effective age checks.
“I stopped engaging with family because I was spending all my time on social media,” she said.
She described developing anxiety and depression by age 10, alongside body image issues linked to filters that altered her appearance.
Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg defended the company’s policies in court, citing its ban on users under 13, while acknowledging enforcement challenges.
“I always wished” for faster progress identifying underage users, he said, adding the company had reached the “right place over time”.
Instagram head Adam Mosseri rejected claims of addiction tied to extreme usage, describing a reported 16-hour session as “problematic” rather than proof of dependency.
Financial impact small, strategic risk large
While the damages are relatively modest for companies of Meta and Alphabet’s scale, analysts say the broader implications are significant.
“This process will likely get dragged out through future cases and appeals, but eventually may cause these companies to put in consumer safeguards that may dampen growth,” said Gil Luria, a technology sector analyst at D.A. Davidson.
Shares in both companies edged higher following the verdict, suggesting investors see the financial risk as contained for now.
But the litigation pipeline is growing.
Another case involving multiple states and school districts is set to go to trial later this year, while additional proceedings are scheduled in California and Los Angeles.
Instagram head Adam Mosseri
The ruling comes alongside a separate New Mexico verdict that found Meta liable for exposing children to harmful content, underscoring what Forrester analyst Mike Proulx described as a “breaking point” between social media companies and the public.
“Negative sentiment toward social media has been building for years, and now it’s finally boiled over,” Proulx said.
In parallel, US lawmakers and state governments are moving to tighten regulations, including age-verification requirements and restrictions on device use in schools.