Meta appeals landmark jury verdict that found it to blame for social
media addiction for young users
[July 11, 2026] By
KAITLYN HUAMANI
Meta, the parent company of Instagram and Facebook, has appealed the
verdict of a landmark social media addiction lawsuit in Los Angeles,
challenging the jury's determination that the company designed its
platforms to hook young users without concern for their well-being.
Lawyers representing Meta filed a notice of appeal Tuesday in Los
Angeles County Superior Court. The lawyers will provide their arguments
related to the appeal in subsequent court filings.
The case centered on a 20-year-old woman who said she became addicted to
social media as a child and that it worsened her mental health
struggles. The jury found that negligence by both Meta and Google-owned
YouTube, which was also a defendant in the case, was a substantial
factor in causing harm to the young woman, identified in court only by
her initials, KGM, and her first name, Kaley.
The jury awarded her $3 million in damages and recommended an additional
$3 million in punitive damages. Her lead attorney, Mark Lanier, said in
a statement Friday that the legal team is expecting the appellate court
to “continue the careful application of the law to this case, affirming
the verdict of the trial court.”
A notice of appeal starts what can be a lengthy process. A Meta
spokesperson provided a statement Friday that they also gave when the
jury returned the verdict in March, saying that teen mental health is
“profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app.”
José Castañeda, a spokesperson for Google, said in a statement Friday
that YouTube plans to appeal and that “these are standard motions for
this case to move forward.”
Meta and Google had each filed post-trial motions for judgment
notwithstanding the verdict — a routinely filed motion by defense
lawyers asking a judge to toss out the jury’s verdict — and for a new
trial. The trial judge, Carolyn B. Kuhl, denied those motions in early
June.
[to top of second column] |
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg arrives for a landmark trial over whether
social media platforms deliberately addict and harm children, Feb.
18, 2026, in Los Angeles. (AP Photo/Ryan Sun, File)
 Tech companies like Meta and YouTube
are shielded from legal responsibility for content posted by third
parties, based on Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency
Act. To get around those protections, the plaintiffs focused on the
design features of the platforms like “infinite scroll,” or the
endless nature of feeds on the platforms, and autoplay functions.
Questions about encroaching into content-related territory were the
subject of many objections from the defendants throughout the
five-week trial.
The verdict in this case came during a time of legal woes for Meta.
A jury in New Mexico returned a verdict finding that Meta's
platforms harm children’s mental health and safety just one day
before the California jury reached its decision. The New Mexico
jury, siding with state prosecutors who brought the case, landed on
a penalty of $375 million. Meta has said the company disagrees with
the verdict and will also appeal in that case.
“We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously, and we remain
confident in our record of protecting teens online,” a Meta
spokesperson said in a statement at the time of the verdicts and
again on Friday.
Kaley's case was a first-of-its-kind lawsuit, and the verdict could
influence the outcome of thousands of similar lawsuits accusing
social media companies of deliberately causing harm. TikTok and
Snapchat parent company Snap Inc. were also initially named as
defendants in the case, but each settled for undisclosed sums before
the trial began.
All contents © copyright 2026 Associated Press. All rights reserved |
