Meta has agreed to pay up to $17.1 billion under a proposed settlement that would impose changes on how Instagram and Facebook operate for teen users in participating jurisdictions. Announced Aug. 26 by a bipartisan coalition of 51 attorneys general, the agreement brought a child-safety trial to an end during its second week. If approved, it would rank among the largest state consumer-protection settlements in U.S. history outside the tobacco litigation of the 1990s.
The agreement remains subject to approval by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in the Northern District of California. While the Social Media Victims Law Center was not a party to the states’ action, and the settlement does not resolve claims asserted by families, SMVLC continues to pursue Meta addiction and harm lawsuits for parents whose children suffered injuries allegedly connected to the platforms.
Statement From Matthew P. Bergman on the Meta Settlement:
“Meta’s decision to settle the lawsuits brought by State Attorneys General for $17 billion is a watershed moment in holding the tech giant accountable for designing products it knew were harming children and fueling a nationwide youth mental health crisis.
Over the past year, Meta has suffered overwhelming defeats in courts across the country as expert testimony and its own internal documents revealed that senior executives ignored repeated warnings that its products were addictive and harmful by design. They chose profit over the lives of our children.
Today is a day that we honor the memories of the children who have been lost or harmed because of social media. We honor the families who have worked tirelessly over the last five years to seek justice for their children, and to educate other families and young people about the dangers of social media so that no parent ever has to experience the heartbreak they have lived through. What began with a single lawsuit has grown into a national movement that is now sweeping across the world to protect children.
But our work is far from over. We will continue fighting for the individual families whose children will never come home, and for those still struggling with mental health crises caused by these platforms. Accountability to the public is important — but accountability to the families harmed must remain our focus.”
What Meta Agreed to Pay
Under the proposed settlement, participating states would receive about $12.2 billion, with payments potentially reaching $17.1 billion over 10 years as long as specified conditions are met. California’s share would range from $1.5 billion to $2.1 billion, according to the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office.
States may use the money for lawful remedial purposes under applicable laws and the settlement’s state-specific provisions. Permitted uses include youth mental health services, crisis intervention, and after-school programs.
The total includes $459.3 million resolving government claims involving Meta’s alleged sharing of Facebook users’ nonpublic information with third parties, including Cambridge Analytica. The settlement funds go to participating governments and do not create a compensation fund for families pursuing private injury claims.
The Safety Changes Coming to Instagram and Facebook
Subject to court approval, the settlement would impose protections for users under 18 in participating jurisdictions, generally within six months of court approval. The California attorney general’s office highlighted:
- Time controls: A two-hour combined daily limit on covered Instagram and Facebook use, periodic notices and pauses, and default restrictions from midnight to 6 a.m. A supervising parent could loosen these settings.
- Notification limits: Default restrictions overnight and during school hours, with parental controls and limited exceptions for messages and security alerts.
- Safer content and feeds: Like and reaction counts are hidden by default, teens are barred from applying cosmetic procedure filters, and there is an option to use a non-personalized feed.
- Age and content safeguards: Stronger age assurance, enforcement against accounts belonging to children under 13, and protections against inappropriate content and suspicious adult accounts.
- Faster reporting decisions: Processes designed to provide decisions within six hours for at least 90% of covered English- or Spanish-language reports.
- Oversight and accountability: Expanded parental-supervision tools, independent audits, and a prohibition on false or misleading claims about teen safety features.
Why the Case Settled in Its Second Week
The trial began in Oakland, California, on Aug. 18 and was expected to continue into October. The states alleged that Meta intentionally designed Instagram and Facebook to encourage compulsive use among young users, knew from internal research that young users were experiencing harm, and failed to disclose those risks to parents and the public.
Testimony during the second week addressed Meta’s priorities and youth-safety measures. Former Meta employee and whistleblower Arturo Béjar testified that the company prioritized user growth and that internal studies documented harmful experiences among teens at rates higher than Meta publicly acknowledged. Instagram head Adam Mosseri was questioned about “Take a Break,” a feature encouraging teens to stop using the app. Evidence showed that only 1.8% of teens used the feature at one point, a figure Meta had not disclosed. Meta denied the allegations, and the proposed settlement does not constitute an admission of liability or wrongdoing.
What the Settlement Does Not Resolve
The difference between government claims and private claims matters to the families we represent. The proposed judgment would resolve participating jurisdictions’ claims but excludes “any claims of private individuals for any types of monetary or injunctive relief.”
The agreement preserves claims in the federal multidistrict litigation before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, the coordinated California state court proceeding, and other U.S. courts. That includes claims by private plaintiffs, school districts, municipalities, tribal entities, political subdivisions, and other governmental units outside the participating jurisdictions’ actions.
Accordingly, the settlement does not itself release, settle, or extinguish a family’s potential claim against Meta. It does not, however, determine whether a claim will succeed. Families must still establish the required legal elements, meet filing deadlines, and address any defenses that Meta may raise. The agreement also does not create a private right to enforce its safety provisions or constitute an admission of liability by Meta.
How This Fits With the Rest of the Litigation
The settlement comes after other significant adverse rulings involving Meta this year. In August, a New Mexico court ordered Meta to deposit $567 million into an abatement fund after finding that the company substantially contributed to a public nuisance. That order followed a $375 million jury verdict in March for 75,000 violations of the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act, bringing the total monetary relief in the case to $942 million. SMVLC covered the ruling in “Meta Ordered to Pay $942 Million in New Mexico for Harming Kids.” Meta has said it will appeal.
Also in March, a Los Angeles jury awarded $6 million in damages against Meta and Google-owned YouTube in the first U.S. social media addiction case to reach a jury. SMVLC founder Matthew P. Bergman helped bring the case. That verdict survived a post-trial challenge and is on appeal.
Commenting on the ruling, Bergman described a pattern that this settlement reflects again.
“These are common sense changes that the judge required that Meta’s own internal safety personnel have been recommending to the company for years. They just won’t implement those changes if it costs them a dollar of revenue.”
Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr made a similar point today, noting that Meta is the first major platform to reach a comprehensive resolution on youth safety and that it “shouldn’t be the last.”
What Families Can Do Now
If your child developed depression, anxiety, an eating disorder, or engaged in self-harm connected to Instagram or Facebook, or was targeted for sextortion on those platforms, today’s announcement does not close any door for you. State penalties fund public programs. They do not compensate an individual family for what happened to their child, and this agreement was written to keep those two tracks separate.
Our firm continues to file cases against Meta, including lawsuits brought for families who lost children to suicide following sextortion on Instagram. If you want to understand what options your family may have, SMVLC offers a free and confidential case evaluation with no cost and no obligation.
