At a glance: Social media trials could reshape legal shield protecting tech companies

Meta is facing two separate jury trials — one in Los Angeles County Superior Court and another in Santa Fe, New Mexico — that test whether the company misled the public about youth safety and whether features of its platforms contributed to harm involving children.

In the Los Angeles case, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified Wednesday, Feb. 18, 2026, in a lawsuit brought by a now-20-year-old woman identified in court papers as KGM. Her lawyers argue that early use of social media, including Instagram, contributed to compulsive use and worsened depression and suicidal thoughts. 

Meta and Google’s YouTube are the remaining defendants after TikTok and Snap settled. The case is one of several selected as bellwether trials that could influence how thousands of similar claims against social media companies proceed.

The Associated Press reports that Zuckerberg faced questioning about issues including Meta’s policies on underage users and internal guidance he has received about how to communicate publicly, including advice to avoid coming off as “robotic.” 

When asked about his charitable pledges and whether he had pledged money to victims harmed by social media, Zuckerberg responded that he disagreed with the “characterization” of the question. 

Meta’s defense has argued it does not dispute that KGM experienced mental health struggles, but disputes that Instagram was a substantial factor, citing other stressors documented in her records and contending she used social media as a coping mechanism.

Separately, New Mexico’s case is a civil enforcement trial brought by the state’s Attorney General Raúl Torrez, alleging Meta violated the state’s consumer protection laws by failing to disclose what it knew about risks and harmful effects to children. The state also alleges Meta created a public nuisance and fostered conditions that enabled child sexual exploitation. 

AP reports the state’s investigators built parts of the case by using accounts that posed as minors and documenting sexual solicitations and Meta’s responses. Meta denies wrongdoing and has criticized the state’s investigative methods as “ethically compromised.”

Both cases are being closely watched because plaintiffs and states are attempting to pursue claims in ways that could limit the reach of legal defenses often cited by tech companies, including the First Amendment and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which has generally shielded platforms from liability for user-posted content.