Lexi Hazam and Previn Warren, attorneys representing thousands of school districts and individuals suing Meta and other companies in the litigation over the claims in federal court, said in a statement the ruling would allow the states' trial to move forward, as well as a trial over claims brought by school districts scheduled for February.
"A trial is how the public finds out what Meta knew about its products' impact on children, when it knew it, and what it chose to do with that knowledge," the attorneys said. "Meta has fought to keep that evidence from the public."
Filed by states, municipalities, school districts and individuals, the lawsuits allege that social media companies intentionally addicted young users, contributing to surging depression, anxiety and body-image issues and a broader mental health crisis among American youth in recent years.
The cases, which have been centralized before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, seek damages, penalties and restitution from the companies. The companies appealed Rogers’ orders in 2023 and 2024 that largely allowed the litigation to move forward.
The companies are facing hundreds of additional lawsuits over similar claims in state court, with approximately 3,300 of them in a consolidated proceeding in California state court.
In the first lawsuit to go to trial in the California litigation, and a closely watched test of how juries might respond to similar claims, a Los Angeles jury in March found Meta and Google negligent for designing social media platforms that harm young people. The jury awarded $6 million to a young woman who says she became addicted to Instagram and YouTube as a child.
The New Mexico public nuisance ruling against Meta followed an earlier phase in the trial, in which a jury in March ordered it to pay $375 million after finding it had misled consumers about the safety of its platforms.
Both Meta and Google, which have denied the claims in those cases, said they would appeal.
META•
