Massachusetts HC heard arguments in a lawsuit accusing Meta of designing addictive features for teens
The state targets product design, not content moderation, to prove abuse of teen psychology
Meta argues the suit is barred by the First Amendment, claiming its design choices are protected
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on Friday heard arguments in a high-stakes lawsuit filed by the state’s attorney general that accuses Meta Platforms of intentionally designing features on Facebook and Instagram to make them addictive for young users.
The suit, brought in 2024 by Attorney General Andrea Campbell, contends the company engineered product mechanics, such as relentless notifications and infinite scrolling, to capture and keep teenagers’ attention for profit.
1 December 2025
Get the latest issue of Outlook Business
State Solicitor David Kravitz told the court the case rests on the company’s own tools and internal research showing those tools encourage addictive use among minors. He stressed the complaint does not challenge Meta’s content-moderation choices or the truthfulness of what the company publishes; instead, Massachusetts argues the claim targets the way Meta’s product features are designed to “feed into” young users’ fear of missing out and habitual use.
Meta’s Defense
Meta strongly disputed the claims. Its attorney, Mark Mosier, argued the company’s actions are protected speech and traditional publishing functions, saying the suit would improperly impose liability for choices about how information is presented. Mosier told the justices that, because the state is not alleging false or fraudulent speech, the claims fall squarely within First Amendment protections.
Several justices pressed on whether the case is really about design and engagement tactics rather than the content itself. Justice Dalila Wendland observed the state’s concern centers on “an algorithm of incessant notifications” designed to exploit teen psychology.
Justice Scott Kafker framed the dispute as one over methods to attract attention, “how to attract the eyeballs”, arguing that the question before the court may be whether product design intended to hook users is a regulable practice distinct from publishing speech.
Policy Backdrop
The Massachusetts case is part of a wider regulatory and legal push against Big Tech. In 2023, a multistate action by 33 states alleged unlawful data collection from children under 13, and other states have filed their own suits accusing Meta of designing addictive features that harm minors.
The company has also faced whistleblower reports and NGO critiques alleging insufficient steps to protect young users, claims Meta says mischaracterise its efforts.
If the court allows the case to proceed on the design-based theory advanced by Massachusetts, it could open a new front for state regulation of platform design practices.
Meta says it is confident the evidence will vindicate its approach; the state argues existing research and internal documents support its claims. The justices did not announce a timetable for a ruling; the decision will be closely watched as other states and courts grapple with similar questions about how far traditional competition- and safety-focused law can reach into the mechanics of social platforms.
