Landmark case against Meta: ‘Serious concerns about design of online platforms’
A major lawsuit has begun in the US against the parent company of Whatsapp and Instagram. Prosecutors allege that Meta intentionally designs apps that are addictive for children. Simone van der Hof sees a broader pattern in this wave of lawsuits.
In the largest lawsuit against Meta to date, nearly 30 US states argue that the company uses techniques designed to keep children on its platforms for as long as possible. The lawsuit also alleges that Meta collected data from children under the age of 13 without parental permission, in violation of US law. According to Simone van der Hof, Professor of Law and Digital Technologies, ‘there are serious concerns about the design choices made by online platforms and their impact on users’ autonomy, well-being, and rights, particularly those of children.’
Addictive features
The stakes are high. The states want Meta to change what they describe as the ‘addictive features’ built into its apps, calling a halt to video autoplay, thumbs-up ‘likes’, appearance-altering filters, and the possibility to create multiple accounts. They also want parents to be required to verify their children's accounts. Finally, they are seeking damages that, according to Meta itself, could amount to as much as $1.2 trillion, a figure the company argues shows that the lawsuit is ‘unreasonable’.
This is not the first time that action has been taken against Meta, but it is the largest lawsuit ever brought against the company. Earlier this year, a jury in the United States found that Meta and Google had deliberately designed their apps, Instagram and YouTube, to be addictive. ‘The discussion often focuses on screen time, but that’s only one part of the problem,’ says Van der Hof.
Harmful content, harmful contacts (such as those at the centre of US cases involving Meta and Omegle over child sexual abuse), dangerous online challenges, and microtransactions that children later regret are, in her view, all part of the same spectrum. Van der Hof and Catalina Goanta (Utrecht University) have conducted research into the microtransactions that children make online.
According to California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Meta designed Facebook and Instagram ‘to keep kids on the platforms longer and longer – to the point of physical and mental harm.’ He argues that this is ‘not only morally wrong, it’s also illegal.’ Meta, for its part, says it has taken extensive measures to protect young users and maintains that it will be able to demonstrate this in court.
Limiting risks for young people
At the federal level, the United States has relatively few regulations governing social media and children; the states bringing the lawsuit are seeking to use the courts to fill that gap. In Europe, the Digital Services Act (DSA), which came into force in 2024, requires major platforms to proactively assess and mitigate risks to minors. Last year, the European Commission formally reprimanded Meta and TikTok over the very same design choices that are now the subject of legal action by the US states.
‘The companies will first be given the opportunity to respond,’ says Van der Hof. ‘After that, a substantial fine may be imposed. This could mean that the platforms will have to make changes within the EU, and that will also have an impact in the Netherlands.’
Holding Meta and Google to account
Dutch regulators are also making their voices heard. In October 2025, digital rights and civil liberties organisation Bits of Freedom won a case against Meta: under the DSA, the company must allow users to choose a news feed that is not curated by recommendation algorithms. More recently, the Dutch Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) launched an investigation into Roblox under the DSA, focusing on the protection of children on the online gaming platform.
Meanwhile, pressure on Meta is mounting in other countries as well. In New Mexico alone, a court this month imposed a fine of more than half a billion dollars on the company for mental harm caused to young people. For the first time, a US judge ruled that a social media company constitutes a ‘public nuisance’, a legal concept the judge compared to air pollution.
A pattern is emerging. If the states prevail and Meta is forced to disable features such as ‘likes’ or video autoplay, it will mark the first time a court has ruled on fundamental design choices. From a children’s rights perspective, Van der Hof sees this as a positive development: ‘It’s encouraging that lawsuits like these are drawing attention to designs that are not age-appropriate, and that companies are being held to account.’