Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is scheduled to take the stand on Wednesday, February 18, 2026, in a high-profile Los Angeles trial that accuses social media platforms of deliberately designing addictive features harmful to children and teens. The testimony marks Zuckerberg's first appearance before a jury in such a case and is one of the most anticipated moments in the ongoing multidistrict litigation against major tech companies.
The trial, unfolding in Los Angeles Superior Court, stems from a lawsuit filed by a now 20-year-old woman identified in court documents as K.G.M. She alleges that her early and prolonged use of Instagram and YouTube—platforms owned by Meta and Google (Alphabet), respectively—contributed to severe depression, anxiety, self-harm, and suicidal thoughts. Lawyers for the plaintiff argue that the companies intentionally engineered "digital casinos" with features like infinite scrolling, notifications, likes, and algorithmic feeds to maximize user engagement, knowing the risks to young users' mental health.
Opening statements in the case began earlier in February 2026, with the trial expected to last several weeks into March. It serves as a bellwether for hundreds of similar lawsuits consolidated under multidistrict litigation (MDL) proceedings, potentially influencing how courts handle claims that social media platforms are defectively designed products akin to addictive substances.
Zuckerberg, 41, will face tough questioning from plaintiffs' attorneys about internal Meta documents, safety team warnings, and decisions to prioritize growth and revenue over youth protection. The testimony follows earlier appearances by other executives, including Instagram CEO Adam Mosseri, who testified on February 11, 2026, and defended the company's safety measures while rejecting claims of intentional addiction.
Grieving families from across the U.S.—some of whom lost children to suicide they attribute in part to social media use—have traveled to Los Angeles in hopes of securing courtroom seats to witness Zuckerberg's testimony. Many were present at a January 31, 2024, Senate Judiciary Committee hearing where Zuckerberg publicly apologized to affected families, an event that drew sharp criticism for being performative without substantive change.
A Meta spokesperson has strongly denied the allegations, stating the company is "confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people." Meta has highlighted features introduced over the years, such as age-appropriate defaults, time-limit tools, parental controls, and restrictions on harmful content, arguing these demonstrate proactive efforts to protect minors. The company maintains that social media provides significant benefits, including connection, education, and support for vulnerable users.
The case draws parallels to past litigation against tobacco and opioid industries, where companies faced claims that products were engineered for addiction despite known harms. Plaintiffs cite internal research and whistleblower testimony—such as from former Meta employee Frances Haugen—alleging that executives ignored or downplayed risks to teen mental health in pursuit of engagement metrics and advertising revenue.
No livestream of the proceedings is available, as is typical for civil trials in California state courts. However, media coverage and courtroom reporting are expected to provide real-time updates on Zuckerberg's responses.
The trial's outcome could have far-reaching implications. A plaintiff victory might open the door to substantial damages and force industry-wide changes in platform design, content moderation, and youth safety protocols. A defense win could bolster arguments that social media companies bear no product liability for user behavior and reinforce First Amendment protections for online speech and algorithms.
As Zuckerberg prepares to testify, the case underscores ongoing national debates about social media's role in teen mental health, regulatory oversight, and corporate responsibility. With hundreds of similar suits pending, the Los Angeles trial is closely watched as a potential turning point in holding Big Tech accountable for alleged harms to young users.
