Two landmark trials against Meta and YouTube could fundamentally reshape social media for Americans, especially children. As Dan Schneider, Vice President for Free Speech at the Media Research Center told Fox News’ Fox & Friends First on Wednesday, “these cases could fundamentally reshape how everyone interacts with social media.”
In New Mexico, the Attorney General accuses Meta of turning Facebook and Instagram into a "marketplace for predators," enabling sexual exploitation, grooming, and human trafficking of minors. In California, a bellwether youth lawsuit targets Meta (Instagram) and Google's YouTube. A 20-year-old plaintiff alleges deliberate addictive designs—endless scrolling, algorithms, notifications—hooked her young, exacerbating depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts. Plaintiffs argue companies engineered "digital casinos" for profit over well-being. Defense denies clinical "addiction" exists, calling it "problematic use," and blames family dynamics instead.
Did Mark Zuckerberg intentionally design his product to addict kids and make money off that addiction or was he trying to make a product that people liked and balance that risk and reward? @Schneider_DC joins @FoxFriendsFirst to discuss landmark social media trial pic.twitter.com/IHdBLY4w8e
— Media Research Center (@theMRC) February 18, 2026
Mark Zuckerberg, subpoenaed in the California case, faces scrutiny over his 2024 Senate apology to harmed families—"I'm sorry for everything you've been through"—which plaintiffs may frame as admitting knowledge of harm. As Schneider noted on Fox & Friends First, plaintiffs will leverage it to argue clinical addiction, while Meta insists it's "problematic use" they addressed responsibly.
This trial could change the way all of us interact with social media in the future. @Schneider_DC @FoxFriendsFirst pic.twitter.com/FOluVLwzTi
— Media Research Center (@theMRC) February 18, 2026
These "bet the firm" litigations expose Silicon Valley's aggressive defenses amid grieving parents and grieving families in courtrooms versus suited executives. With potential Supreme Court appeals looming, outcomes could limit features like infinite scroll or force major reforms.
Yet Schneider highlights a deeper tragedy: Congress, divided over censorship versus protection, has failed to act nationally. Twelve jurors shouldn't dictate rules for all Americans—lawmakers must step up to balance free speech with safeguarding kids from real harms.
