Introduction

What happens when the very feature that makes your business successful becomes its biggest liability? That is the question hanging over Meta as one of the most significant legal battles in the social media giant's history.

According to the BBC, 29 US states have accused Meta of deliberately designing Facebook and Instagram to keep children and teenagers hooked. The states claim Meta knew its platforms could harm young people's well-being, yet continued to prioritise features designed to keep them scrolling.

Meta denies the allegations. Yet, the stakes are enormous. In 2025, Meta Platforms generated $196.18 billion in advertising revenue out of the $200.97 billion total revenue. Therefore, advertising accounted for roughly 97.6% of its earnings. If a court forces Meta to rethink the features that keep users online, this case could strike at the heart of how social media makes money.

Meta's Own Evidence Takes Centre Stage

Millions of Meta's internal emails, chats and research documents are now before the court. One study found one in five teenagers said Instagram made them feel worse. Meta cites the same research, in which 41% said it made them feel better and 41% said it had no effect.

The states argue that Meta knew the risks but chose engagement anyway. Meta says the evidence is selective and denies its platforms were designed to be addictive.

The states also claim that Meta failed to keep under-13s off its platforms. Meta responds that stronger age checks are difficult when privacy rules limit the data it can collect.

When Engagement Becomes a Liability

Meta's advertising revenue rose 22% year-on-year, while ad impressions increased by 12%.

That does not prove the states' allegations, but it exposes the central commercial tension: what happens when a company's growth strategy and its safety obligations pull in opposite directions?

For advertisers, changes to how users interact with Meta's platforms could affect the volume and type of advertising inventory available.

For competitors, the danger is contagion. If features such as infinite scroll come under legal scrutiny, other platforms using similar tools may have to ask: are we next?

However, for technology vendors selling age-assurance and online-safety tools, tougher requirements could create a new commercial opportunity.

Legal Team Involvement

  • Litigation lawyers may be fighting the case, but they are not the only lawyers who matter.
  • Privacy lawyers face a central contradiction: Companies must protect children, but collecting more data to verify their age can create privacy risks.
  • Regulatory lawyers will monitor how the case shapes future rules on children’s online safety.
  • Commercial and product lawyers could also become crucial if Meta is forced to redesign its platforms, helping engineers turn legal obligations into product changes.

Future Outlook

The trial is ongoing and expected to last six weeks, but its impact could last years.

If Meta loses, it could face major penalties and be forced to change features that helped define modern social media. Competitors may then review their platforms before regulators come knocking.

Even a Meta victory would not stop the wider trend. Courts and regulators increasingly want to know not just what a product does, but what it was designed to make users do.

Meta is defending something far bigger than Facebook and Instagram: how far can a business go in competing for attention before engagement becomes a legal liability?