Weeks after Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg took the stand, fresh details from the courtroom are sharpening the focus on what could become one of the most consequential tech trials in recent years.
On February 18, 2026, Zuckerberg testified before a jury at the Los Angeles County Superior Court in the civil case known as K.G.M. v. Platforms et al.
It was the first time a major tech executive had faced a jury directly over claims that his company built its platforms in ways that hurt children. The case is also connected to more than 40 other lawsuits filed by state attorneys general across the United States.
As the trial continues, newly highlighted internal documents and testimony are adding weight to the claims against Meta Platforms.
During his February appearance, Zuckerberg defended how the company operates. He told the jury that Instagram was built to help people connect meaningfully, not to keep teenagers endlessly scrolling.
He also made a distinction between being clinically addicted to something and simply using it too much, saying the latter is a problem that goes beyond just his company.
He added that Meta has changed over time and no longer focuses on keeping users on its apps for as long as possible.
However, internal emails presented in court appear to paint a more complicated picture. One 2017 message from a former product manager stated that Zuckerberg had made teens the company’s top priority for that period.
Another internal planning document also showed a goal to increase the time teens spent on the platform. When asked about these records, Zuckerberg said tracking a metric doesn’t mean teams were told to chase it at any price.
The case also raised serious questions about how much the company knew about young users on its platform. Internal estimates from 2015 revealed that millions of children under the age of 13 were already using Instagram, despite the platform’s rules prohibiting users below that age.
This meant the company likely knew about the problem long before it ever said anything publicly.
Adding to this, an internal email written by former executive Nick Clegg described the platform’s age restrictions as practically impossible to enforce.
This admission from within the company itself indicated that Meta was aware its systems for keeping underage children off the platform were largely ineffective, raising further questions about what steps, if any, were taken to address the issue.
READ: The UK Is Considering Regulating Infinite Scroll on Social Media
Instagram only required all users to enter their birthdays in 2021.
Usage data shown in court revealed that people are spending more and more time on Instagram each day. Lawyers for the plaintiffs say this supports their argument that the platform is built in a way that pulls young people in and keeps them there.
The trial is still ongoing and its outcome could change how courts handle cases like this in the future and whether tech executives can be held personally responsible for the impact their platforms have on children.
