Meta Platforms is urging a federal judge to reject what it called a legally unsupported damages theory advanced by a coalition of state attorneys general, arguing their request for more than $1 trillion in penalties and the return of profits bears no relationship to the claims headed to trial, Deadline reported.
In a filing submitted Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Meta argued the states' proposed monetary remedies are disconnected from the specific consumer protection and children's privacy claims that remain in the case.
"The AGs have not linked their claimed remedies to their alleged violations," Meta wrote, arguing the states instead seek "over one trillion dollars in penalties and disgorgement" by counting every teen who used Facebook or Instagram and every month a teen spent more than 30 minutes on the platforms.
The company contends those calculations "double count" users and rely on features that the court previously ruled are protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
The filing is part of lawsuits brought by California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey accusing Meta of misleading users about the safety and addictiveness of its platforms, employing unfair platform features, and violating the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act.
Meta argued the trial is limited to whether specific company statements were deceptive, whether three identified platform features constitute unfair practices, and whether the company violated the law. The states, it said, cannot transform the case into a broader referendum on social media addiction or teen mental health.
The company also challenged the states' proposed penalty calculations based on time spent on Instagram and Facebook. It said the attorneys general seek maximum penalties for every day a teen exceeded thresholds of 30 minutes, one hour or two hours on the platforms, without explaining how each instance constituted a separate legal violation.
Meta further accused the states of stacking overlapping penalties by repeatedly counting the same users across multiple remedy charts, arguing the law prohibits duplicate recoveries for the same alleged misconduct.
The filing contends the proposed damages are "untethered" to any alleged legal violations and are "wholly disproportionate" to the claims.
Meta said the $1 trillion figure was assembled by "mixing and matching data from disparate sources" and counting the same individuals multiple times.
It argued the attorneys general have identified no comparable consumer protection or children's online privacy case resulting in a judgment approaching that amount and said presenting the damages theory to a jury would unfairly prejudice the company.
Meta is asking the court to reject the states' damages calculations, limit any monetary relief to remedies supported by the evidence, and permit updated depositions of three state expert witnesses whose analyses underpin the disputed penalty models.