Meta’s Defenses Show Cracks Ahead of States’ Addiction Trial

Meta Platforms Inc.‘s key legal defenses were under pressure from a California federal judge Wednesday, who is overseeing a case on alleged harms to teen’s mental health slated to go to trial this summer.

Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said Meta appears to “flip-flop” between its defenses under the First Amendment and under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act “depending on who they’re in front of.”

“You make the argument that the platform is just a publisher and it gets Section 230 protection, then you say, oh no, actually these are our statements and therefore we get First Amendment protection,” she said. “So which is it?”

The judge had ruled on those two legal defenses at an earlier stage of the case, allowing some but not all of the states’ claims to move forward.

Gonzalez Rogers, who sits on the US District Court for the Northern District of California, is now weighing competing summary judgment motions from Meta and the coalition of dozens of state attorneys general, led by California and Colorado, who brought the case.

The AGs allege Instagram and Facebook deceive and harm children and violate the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. Meta has argued that Section 230 blocks the claims because the statute immunizes internet platforms from lawsuits based on content posted by users.

Meta’s motion is the company’s final chance to defeat or narrow the case before it goes to a trial in August.

The hearing comes on the heels of two landmark jury verdicts last month against Meta finding that it harmed teen users’ mental health and failed to prevent sexual exploitation on its platforms. One case was brought by the New Mexico attorney general and tried in Santa Fe, and the other was tried in California state court in Los Angeles and brought by a woman who claimed she was harmed by an addiction to social media.

Although Gonzalez Rogers appeared skeptical of Meta during the hearing, she also expressed frustration with the state AGs, criticizing their lawyers for not litigating the case efficiently. She said the states had failed to clearly identify the 135 deceptive statements made by Meta.

“It makes my job difficult when I don’t have a clear record,” she said.

Gonzalez Roger in June will oversee the first bellwether trial brought by a school district against Meta, TikTok Inc., Snap Inc., and YouTube LLC over claims the social media companies have caused a student mental health crisis that disrupts learning.

The case is People of the State of California v. Meta Platforms Inc., N.D. Cal., No. 4:23-cv-05448, 4/15/26.