A federal judge said Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg is not personally liable in 25 lawsuits accusing his company of addicting children to social media. US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California rejected accusations on Thursday that Zuckerberg directed Meta’s efforts to conceal from children the serious mental health risks of using Facebook and Instagram. The plaintiffs called Meta’s billionaire co-founder the “guiding spirit” behind alleged concealment efforts, saying he ignored repeated internal warnings about the risks and publicly downplayed them.
But the judge found a lack of specifics about what Zuckerberg did wrong, and said “control of corporate activity alone is insufficient” to establish liability. Her decision does not affect related claims against Meta itself.
The plaintiffs brought claims under the laws of 13 US states: Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin.
Previn Warren, a partner at Motley Rice representing the plaintiffs, said on Friday his clients will continue gathering evidence “to uncover the truth about how Big Tech has knowingly prioritised profits over the safety of our children.”
The 25 lawsuits are among several hundred by children, their families and school districts seeking damages from Meta, Alphabet’s Google, ByteDance’s TikTok and Snap’s Snapchat over social media addiction.
Dozens of US state attorneys general are pursuing similar cases against Meta, linking its social media platforms to anxiety, depression, insomnia, and interference with education and daily life.
The case is In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, US District Court, Northern District of California, No. 22-md-03047.
By Jonathan Stempel; Editing by Jan Harvey
Learn more:
What Fashion Needs to Know About Gen Alpha’s Social Media Restrictions
At least 15 US states have enacted policies regulating cell phone usage among teenagers and children, pointing to the youth mental health crisis and other potential harms of incessant access to the internet. For marketers, the laws pose a barrier to reaching young consumers as well as an opportunity to get to know this cohort better.
