US judge criticises Meta over privilege review in addiction case

The criticism was made in a ruling reported on 9 October 2026. The judge described Meta's evidence approach as concerning, according to the reporting of the court exchange. The company must now respond to demands that it take a fresh look at a large volume of internal material that it had marked as privileged, meaning it had withheld it from the other side on legal advice grounds.

The rebuke comes weeks after Meta brought one of the biggest cases against it to an end. On 26 August 2026 the company announced a settlement of a lawsuit brought by state attorneys general: at least $12.1 billion, rising to up to $17.1 billion according to the New York Attorney General (Meta and Reuters put the maximum at about $18 billion). The trial, presided over by US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, ended with the settlement. Twenty-nine states alleged that Instagram and Facebook were designed to hook young users and that the platforms harvested data from children under 13 for their benefit.

Meta denied wrongdoing as part of the settlement. The company also agreed to nationwide changes for teenage users of Facebook and Instagram, including usage limits and blocks during nighttime hours.

Other cases continue

The settled case was one part of a wider group of social media claims against the company. Meta faces further suits over its impact on teenagers, and it has been defeated twice before, once in a Los Angeles case and once in New Mexico. Meta is appealing the Los Angeles verdict.

These cases generally focus on how Meta designs its products rather than on the content users post. That distinction matters because Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields internet platforms in the United States from liability for material their users publish.

The Los Angeles case was brought over the harm allegedly suffered by a young woman known in court as K.G.M. On 25 March 2026 a jury there found Meta, over Instagram, and Google, over YouTube, liable. Meta and Google are appealing, after the trial judge denied their post-trial motions on 9 June 2026. The appeals raise questions about the legal protections tech companies hold over content posted by others, including Section 230.

Wider litigation

Meta is not alone in the dock. A first test case in the wider social media litigation, brought by a county school district in Kentucky against Meta, Snap, TikTok and YouTube, settled before a trial that had been set for June 2026; agreements later released under a public-records request were reported to total about US$27 million. The next district trials, for Tucson Unified and Charleston County, are due to begin in 2027. A trial of two further personal injury plaintiffs against Meta, YouTube and Snap is set to begin in Los Angeles on 28 October 2026, after a second plaintiff settled with TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube ahead of a trial that had been due in July.

The litigation unfolds under different rules on each side of the Atlantic. In the UK, the Online Safety Act 2023 gives the regulator Ofcom powers over platforms and is built around regulation rather than lawsuits, unlike the United States, where individuals and states sue the companies directly.