META APPEALS LANDMARK SOCIAL MEDIA ADDICTION VERDICT

Meta has appealed a landmark social media addiction verdict in Los Angeles, challenging a jury's finding that the company helped cause harm by designing platforms that hooked young users without sufficient regard for their wellbeing. The Associated Press reported that Meta's lawyers filed a notice of appeal on Tuesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court. The filing begins what can be a lengthy appellate process and does not by itself overturn the verdict. Meta is expected to set out its legal arguments in later court filings.

The case centred on a 20-year-old woman who said she became addicted to social media as a child and that her use of the platforms worsened her mental health struggles. The jury found that negligence by both Meta and Google-owned YouTube was a substantial factor in causing her harm, according to the Associated Press. Those are the jury's findings in the civil case, and Meta is now challenging them through the appeal.

The jury awarded the plaintiff $3 million in damages and recommended an additional $3 million in punitive damages. The Associated Press reported that the verdict found Meta and YouTube liable in connection with platform design and failure-to-warn claims. The case was notable because it focused on how the platforms were allegedly designed and operated, rather than on specific third-party content posted by users. That distinction matters because technology companies have often relied on legal protections for user-generated content in other lawsuits.

Meta disputes the verdict and the broader claim that its platforms can be directly linked to the plaintiff's mental health injuries. A Meta spokesperson said teen mental health is "profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app," according to the Associated Press. Meta and YouTube had asked the trial judge to overturn the verdict or grant a new trial, but those requests were denied before Meta filed its notice of appeal.

The verdict was one of the first major civil decisions testing whether social media companies can be held liable for allegedly addictive product design. It created the judgment Meta is now trying to reverse or reduce. The appeal could address issues including negligence, causation, platform design, jury instructions, damages and legal protections for technology platforms.

The case also sits within a larger wave of lawsuits over youth mental health and social media use. The Associated Press reported that TikTok and Snap were originally part of the case but settled before trial. Other lawsuits by individuals, families, school districts and state governments have alleged that major platforms were designed to maximise engagement among minors while exposing young users to mental health risks. Those broader cases vary by court, defendant and legal theory.

Because the appeal is now under way, the legal outcome is not final. The plaintiff's allegations, the jury's verdict and Meta's appellate position remain distinct, and the appellate court has not ruled on any of the issues raised.

The next developments to watch are Meta's appellate brief, any response from the plaintiff's lawyers, whether YouTube files separate appeal papers, and how the appellate court handles questions around product design and platform liability. For now, the public record is that Meta has filed a notice of appeal challenging the Los Angeles verdict, and the damages award has not been overturned.

Fact-check date: 12 July 2026
Article type: News
Sources: Associated Press; ABC News