Social media giant Meta has filed a motion asking a United States judge to set aside a jury verdict that found the company liable for a young woman’s depression and addiction, according to court documents and media reports. The March verdict, which awarded the plaintiff $6 million (€5.1 million), is considered a bellwether that could shape the outcome of thousands of similar lawsuits across the United States.
The plaintiff, identified only as KGM, testified that she spent up to 16 hours a day on social media platforms, including Instagram and YouTube, and that this exacerbated her mental health struggles. The jury concluded that Meta and Google, YouTube’s parent company, had been negligent in designing their platforms and failed to adequately warn users about the risks.
Meta now argues that the verdict should be overturned because the company is shielded by Section 230 of the US Communications Decency Act, which protects online platforms from liability for harm caused by user-generated content. The company contends that the evidence presented at trial linked KGM’s mental health challenges to the content she viewed, rather than to design features such as infinite scroll and autoplay.
European Parallels and Regulatory Context
While this case unfolds in the United States, its implications resonate across Europe, where regulators are increasingly scrutinising the addictive design of social media platforms. The European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA), which came into full effect in February 2024, imposes stricter obligations on large platforms to assess and mitigate systemic risks, including those related to mental health and addictive behaviour. The DSA’s risk-assessment framework echoes some of the arguments made in the US trial, particularly around algorithmic amplification and design choices.
In a related development, a New Mexico Meta trial could force an algorithm overhaul, echoing concerns already raised by EU regulators. European policymakers are watching these US cases closely, as they may influence future legislative proposals at the national and EU level.
During the trial, Meta argued that KGM’s mental health struggles were due to a turbulent home life, not her social media use. YouTube’s defence focused on the nature of its platform, likening it to television rather than a social network, and noted that KGM’s YouTube use declined as she aged.
The case is one of several bellwether trials that could determine how hundreds of other lawsuits are resolved. In Europe, similar litigation is less common, but the issue of social media addiction has gained traction. A recent survey in the Netherlands found that Holocaust denial creeps into Dutch classrooms via social media, highlighting the broader societal harms linked to platform design.
Meta’s motion to overturn the verdict is pending before the judge, who could either rule in the company’s favour, order a new trial, or let the verdict stand. The outcome will be closely watched on both sides of the Atlantic as a potential precedent for holding tech companies accountable for the mental health effects of their products.
