Can social media companies be held liable for creating dangerous products that cause personal injury?
That’s the novel legal theory being hashed out in a California state court this week, in a case that could send shockwaves through Big Tech.
In opening arguments Monday, attorneys for a 20 year-old plaintiff going by “K.G.M.” claimed she was harmed because Google and Meta “engineered addiction in children’s brains.”
K.G.M.’s is one of a consolidated group of cases representing thousands of plaintiffs accusing giants like Meta, Snap, Tiktok, and Instagram of getting teens hooked on social media, often with serious mental health outcomes. The claims align with a 2023 report from the U.S. surgeon general claiming that social media use is a main contributor to teen depression and anxiety. According to a 2025 PEW research center report, nearly half of teens agreed, saying that social media consumption actively harmed their peer group.
Tech companies are expected to defend themselves by citing a federal law adopted in 1996 that protects them from the posts of their users. Meta has also said this trial “oversimplifies” the issue, and its chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, is expected to testify.
Beyond these lawsuits, a larger question looms: what can or should the courts or congress do to rein in companies’ whose products are so deeply entrenched in modern life?
Could the U.S. follow in Australia’s footsteps and ban social media for children under 16? Should it? Today, we’re talking about the implication of this latest slate of lawsuits, and what might come of them.
Guests:
Frances Haugen – Facebook whistleblower, data scientist, and social media accountability advocate
Brian C. Castrucci – president & CEO of the de Beaumont Foundation
Haley Hinkle – policy counsel at Fairplay, a nonprofit advocacy group