Instagram head Adam Mosseri testified in a historic federal trial in Oakland, California, denying accusations that his company hid low adoption rates for teen safety tools. The lawsuit, brought by 29 U.S. states, alleges Meta intentionally designed addictive products that harmed young users’ mental health.
Meta’s top Instagram executive took the witness stand in a high-stakes federal courtroom, pushing back against allegations that the social media giant deliberately concealed low user engagement for safety features aimed at minors. Adam Mosseri appeared in U.S. District Court in Oakland, California, on Tuesday, marking the first time a senior executive from the parent company has testified in the landmark litigation.
The courtroom showdown pits Meta against a coalition of 29 U.S. states alleging that Facebook and Instagram were intentionally engineered to hook young people. The lawsuit contends that this deliberate design fostered anxiety, depression, and other mental health struggles, alongside claims that the tech giant collected data from children under 13 without parental permission.
Disputing Claims Over the Take a Break
Feature
During testimony, Jason Slothouber, a prosecutor for the state of Colorado, pressed Mosseri on an internal feature called Take a Break
, which prompts users to close the app after sustained scrolling. Slothouber noted that only 1.8% of teenagers signed up for the opt-in tool when it was first introduced, and questioned why Mosseri never publicly disclosed those low adoption numbers while promoting the feature.
Mosseri defended his public communications, stating that while he acknowledged opt-in rates were low, he did not routinely publish specific statistics. Mosseri told the court that Most teens didn’t want it,
but added that Instagram decided to push forward with it anyway.
“I am not trying to encourage my team to hide anything, I want to understand how things work. I can’t think of any time that I’ve encouraged people to bring less information to me.”
Adam Mosseri, Head of Instagram
State attorneys general argued that Instagram deliberately stalled by keeping the tool as an opt-in setting for nearly three years rather than making it a default. Mosseri denied any suggestion of stalling, noting that the company eventually transitioned the tool to a default setting in September 2024 as part of newly introduced Teen Accounts.
Disputed Internal Data and Whistleblower Testimony
The trial has brought intense scrutiny to internal communications at Meta. Earlier in the proceedings, Francesco Fogu, Instagram’s director of product design, faced questioning from prosecutors over presentations prepared for executive leadership.
High Stakes and Broader Legal Pressures
The federal trial in Oakland, overseen by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, is expected to last roughly six weeks. Jurors are slated to issue an advisory verdict, leaving the final decisions on liability, financial penalties, and mandatory product redesigns to the judge.
Meta, a company valued at approximately $1.5 trillion, has warned in court filings that the penalties sought by prosecutors could cost the company up to $1.4 trillion, with potential civil penalties alone approaching $200 billion. Defense attorneys maintain that the plaintiffs have cherry-picked internal documents while ignoring independent research that shows no clear link between adolescent social media use and diminished well-being.
The courtroom battle unfolds against a broader wave of litigation. Earlier in August, a New Mexico state court ordered Meta to pay $567 million and institute strict product restrictions after finding the company created a public nuisance. Meanwhile, separate trials and lawsuits continue to progress in state courts across Tennessee and California.
Keep reading