Meta Platforms Inc. (NASDAQ:META) heads to federal court in Oakland, California, this week to defend itself against a coalition of state attorneys general who allege the company designed Facebook and Instagram to hook young users, with potential damages the company pegs at $1.4 trillion.

What Happened

Jury selection began Wednesday in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, with opening statements set for Tuesday before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. The trial is expected to run six to eight weeks.

The case stems from a lawsuit filed in October 2023 by a bipartisan coalition of 29 state attorneys general, though only California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey are trying the case in this first federal proceeding. It’s set up as an advisory-jury trial — jurors will weigh in on specific questions, but Gonzalez Rogers will ultimately decide the case herself.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri are both on the states’ witness list, though no formal testimony schedule has been released.

The Allegations

The states allege Meta “harnessed powerful and unprecedented technologies to entice, engage, and ultimately ensnare youth and teens,” pointing to design features including infinite scroll, autoplay, push notifications and “like” counters. The complaint claims Meta knew those features could drive compulsive use among minors and misled the public about the risks.

Plaintiffs also allege Meta violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act by collecting data from users under 13 without parental consent.

Beyond monetary damages, the states are seeking changes to how Meta’s apps operate for users under 18, including eliminating infinite scrolling, video autoplay and visible “like” counts.

Meta Pushes Back

A Meta spokesperson called the claims “unsubstantiated” and the requested damages “vastly disproportionate.”

“The AGs offer no proof anyone in their states was misled, claim benign features like having an additional Instagram account somehow harmed their residents, and attempt to penalize Meta for industry-wide challenges like age verification,” the spokesperson said. “We stand by our record of creating strong protections for teens, and look forward to making our case in court.”

Meta has also argued that Section 230 should shield the company from liability, though a Ninth Circuit panel previously declined to delay the trial on those grounds. The states counter that they’re targeting product design decisions, not user-generated content.

Why It Matters

Meta enters the trial already facing fallout from earlier rulings. A New Mexico court ordered the company earlier this month to pay $567 million toward a teen mental health fund, on top of $375 million in civil penalties. In March, a Los Angeles jury found Meta and Google’s YouTube negligent in a separate case brought by a young woman who said the platforms contributed to her anxiety, depression and self-harm as a teenager; jurors awarded $6 million in combined damages, split between the two companies. Both companies said they would appeal.

The Oakland case carries higher stakes than any single-plaintiff lawsuit: it combines state enforcement power, statutory penalties and a broader liability theory across millions of underage accounts. A ruling against Meta could set a precedent affecting any platform built around engagement and time-on-app, while a win could bolster the industry’s defense against similar claims in the thousands of related lawsuits Meta and other social media companies face nationwide.

What’s Next

Opening statements begin Tuesday. With Zuckerberg and Mosseri both expected to testify at some point over the coming weeks, their appearances will likely draw the heaviest scrutiny as the trial unfolds.