LA Jury Finds Meta, Google Negligent in Social Media Harm Case

Legal expert says ruling could be a 'Big Tobacco moment' for tech giants

Mar. 27, 2026 at 3:57am

A Los Angeles jury found tech giants Meta and Google negligent for designing social media platforms that are harmful to young people. Jeremy Rosenthal, a trial attorney, says the case was unique to California law and that tech companies are still protected by the First Amendment, but the ruling could ultimately prove to be a 'bellwether case' similar to the 'Big Tobacco moment' for the industry.

Why it matters

This case highlights the growing legal and public scrutiny over the potential harms of social media, especially for young users. It could set a precedent for future lawsuits against tech companies over the design and impact of their platforms.

The details

The Los Angeles jury found Meta and Google negligent in designing their social media platforms in a way that is harmful to young people. While the tech companies are still protected by the First Amendment, legal expert Jeremy Rosenthal says this case could prove to be a 'bellwether' that leads to further legal challenges, similar to how lawsuits against the tobacco industry eventually led to major changes.

  • The Los Angeles jury reached its verdict on March 27, 2026.

The players

Meta

The parent company of social media platforms including Facebook and Instagram.

Google

The tech giant that owns YouTube and other online services.

Jeremy Rosenthal

A trial attorney and founding partner of the law firm Rosenthal, Kalabus and Therrian.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“This case was unique to California law and that tech companies are still protected by the First Amendment; however, this could ultimately prove to be a 'Big Tobacco moment,' he says, and a bellwether case.”

— Jeremy Rosenthal, Trial Attorney and Founding Partner

The takeaway

This landmark ruling against tech giants Meta and Google could open the door for more legal challenges over the potential harms of social media, especially for young users. The case highlights the growing scrutiny over the industry's practices and the need to balance free speech with public safety concerns.