The Supreme Court rejected the appeal filed by Meta Platforms to stop a lawsuit brought by the state of Vermont, which accuses the company of contributing to the addiction of minors to its digital platforms.

The highest court's decision, issued through a brief order without explanation, a common practice in procedural matters, leaves in place the ruling of the Vermont Supreme Court, which allowed the litigation filed by the state's attorney general, Charity Clark, to continue.

The case represents another judicial setback for Meta amid a growing wave of lawsuits in different states of the country that seek to hold big technology companies responsible for the impact of social networks on the mental health of adolescents and children.

Meta argued before the U.S. Supreme Court that Vermont did not have jurisdiction to prosecute the lawsuit because the company is based in California and because the design of its apps has no specific ties to the state. However, Vermont authorities argued that the company maintains an active presence in the local market, obtains income from users and advertisers in the state and has a large base of teenagers who use its platforms.

Investigation into harm to minors

The lawsuit was filed in 2023 following an investigation led by a bipartisan coalition of state attorneys general into the impact of social media on minors. The state accuses Meta of deliberately designing addictive features on Facebook and Instagram to increase young users' stay time on its apps.

Internal company documents, previously revealed in journalistic investigations, indicated that Meta was aware of the possible negative effects of Instagram on the mental health of adolescents, especially among young women.

One of the internal studies cited in the lawsuit indicates that 13.5% of adolescent girls surveyed stated that Instagram worsened their suicidal thoughts, while 17% said that the platform aggravated their eating disorders.

The debate about the influence of social networks on minors has gained strength in Washington and in different state legislatures. According to the Pew Research Center, almost all adolescents between 13 and 17 years old in the United States use some social platform and approximately a third say they are connected “almost constantly.”

Meta faces increasing pressure

The Supreme Court's ruling comes after other adverse rulings for Meta and technology platforms such as YouTube in similar litigation in California and New Mexico, where the companies also face accusations related to alleged mechanisms designed to encourage compulsive use among minors.

In response to criticism, Meta has publicly defended its security policies and assured that it has implemented dozens of tools focused on supporting teenagers and families, including parental controls, time limits and restrictions on sensitive content.

The company has also stated that it is willing to collaborate with legislators and state authorities to develop regulations on the use of social networks by minors.

For her part, Charity Clark welcomed the court decision and stated that the ruling confirms that “companies that choose to do business in Vermont, like Meta, can be held responsible when they harm children.”

Although the Supreme Court's decision does not go into the substance of the case, it does allow the judicial process to continue in federal courts in Vermont, where accusations about the design and operation of Meta's digital platforms and their alleged impact on the mental health of young Americans will be analyzed.