Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta could face penalties totaling $1.4 trillion if four states prevail in their lawsuit alleging the social media giant fueled a teen mental health crisis, according to company filings that describe the figure as outlandish and unprecedented. The penalty would nearly equal the entire market value of the company, currently just above $1.5 trillion.
The New York Post reports that Meta has disclosed that it faces potential penalties of $1.4 trillion in a lawsuit brought by state attorneys general over allegations the company contributed to a teen mental health crisis. The massive sum, which approaches the company’s entire market capitalization, stems from penalty calculations proposed by the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey.
The tech giant arrived at this figure based on how these four states have argued penalties should be calculated if they win their case. Meta’s legal team has strongly contested these proposals, calling them unprecedented in consumer protection enforcement history.
“A sanction of that size has no analog in the history of consumer protection enforcement,” Meta’s attorneys wrote in a filing submitted late Monday, describing the states’ proposals as “unsubstantiated” and “outlandish.”
The case is scheduled to proceed to trial in Oakland federal court on August 18. A total of 29 states have joined the lawsuit against Meta, which accuses the company of major violations of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. This federal legislation prohibits the collection of data from underage users without obtaining parental consent.
Beyond privacy violations, the lawsuit alleges that Facebook and Instagram were intentionally designed to be addictive to children and teenagers. The states claim these design choices have caused widespread mental health problems among young users, including anxiety, depression, self-harm, and in some cases, suicide.
The four states leading the push for maximum penalties are also pursuing claims that Meta deliberately misled the public about safety risks associated with its platforms. While the specific penalty proposals remain under seal, plaintiff attorneys indicated at a court hearing last month that their calculations were based on local state laws and estimates of the number of underage users affected in each jurisdiction.
Meta has denied all wrongdoing and argues that the four states’ proposed remedies exceed the scope of the case. The company’s legal team contends that prosecutors are improperly counting teen users multiple times based on their daily usage duration of Facebook and Instagram, resulting in inflated penalty calculations.
“These remedies have no basis in the record in this case, are entirely unmoored from the claimed deceptive statements or unfair practices, are based on features this Court has held are immune from liability under Section 230, and violate the legal and due process limits on [Unfair Practices Act] penalties,” the company’s lawyers wrote. They referenced Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934, which generally protects online platforms from liability for user-generated content. According to Meta, the judge has already questioned the validity of the states’ penalty calculation, which the company contends is based data double counted or even quadruple counted in some cases.
A spokesperson for the California attorney general’s office responded to Meta’s filing with a statement: “Our lawsuit alleges Meta has prioritized profits over the safety of kids and fueled the mental health crisis we see impacting a generation of American children. The California Department of Justice looks forward to holding Meta fully accountable at trial in August.”
A Facebook statement provided to Breitbart News reads: “The plaintiffs’ outlandish calculations have no basis in fact or law. We’ll continue to defend ourselves against headline-seeking demands that are untethered from reality.”
Breitbart News previously reported that U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers denied Meta’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit on June 30:
U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers issued a ruling this week denying Meta’s motion to dismiss claims centered on deceptive practices, unfair business conduct, and violations of the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. The decision represents a significant development in ongoing litigation that accuses the social media giant of prioritizing engagement over the wellbeing of young users.
Judge Gonzalez Rogers determined that Meta failed to comply with the children’s online privacy law regarding notice and parental consent requirements. The court granted summary judgment to the states on this specific issue, eliminating the need for trial on that particular claim.
Breitbart News reported in March that Meta was found negligent in a landmark child social media addiction case:
In a precedent-setting verdict, jurors in the high profile social media addiction trial deliberated for more than 40 hours across nine days before determining that both Meta and YouTube were negligent in the design and operation of their platforms. The jury concluded that each company’s negligence was a substantial factor in causing harm to the plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman who testified that her childhood use of social media created an addiction to the technology and aggravated her mental health problems.
The multimillion-dollar award is expected to increase significantly, as jurors determined that the companies acted with malice or highly egregious conduct. This finding means the jury will soon hear additional evidence and return to deliberations to decide on punitive damages, which could substantially raise the total compensation.
Meta and Google-owned YouTube were the final two defendants remaining in the case after TikTok and Snap reached settlements before the trial commenced. The plaintiff, identified in court documents as KGM and referred to as Kaley by her legal team during proceedings, provided testimony alongside high-profile technology executives. Meta leaders Mark Zuckerberg and Adam Mosseri appeared as witnesses, while YouTube CEO Neal Mohan was not called to testify.
Read more at the New York Post here.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of AI, free speech, and online censorship.
Read the full article here