What if the next time you open Instagram, there is no endless scroll?

That is one possible consequence of a US trial that could force Meta to change how Facebook and Instagram work. The case is focused on children, but its outcome could affect the design of social media more broadly, from autoplay and algorithmic feeds to the way platforms keep users coming back.

Meta says it faces a potential trillion-dollar penalty and damage to its advertising model if it loses.

The American states bringing the case want the court to make Meta remove what they describe as “certain addictive design features” from Facebook and Instagram. These include infinite scrolling, autoplaying videos, disappearing content such as Instagram Stories, beauty filters and algorithm-dominated feeds.

During opening statements on Tuesday, California Deputy Attorney General Megan O’Neill accused Meta of putting profit ahead of safety and concealing the “reality” of children under 13 using its platforms.

Meta’s business model, she said, was to “hook the users, hold them for as long as they can, harvest their data, and then hide the truth from the public”.

 

Also read: Humanoids to robot chefs, all that’s unique at World Robot Conference 2026 in Beijing

 

Why the case could spread beyond Meta

The case is not happening in isolation. US states are pursuing social media companies over alleged harms to children, with lawsuits also pending against YouTube and Snap.

“This trial is potentially the end of social media as we know it,” said Kate Winick, a principal analyst at Forrester, told CNBC.

“Any verdict against Meta would set a massive precedent,” Winick said. She compared the cases with the lawsuits against the tobacco industry in the 1990s, saying the outcome could make social media harder for young people to access and change how the platforms are viewed.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta said Meta was “first in line” as states take social media companies to court.

“Who goes first? Who goes last? Ideally, they all go at the same time,” Bonta said. “That’s not possible. In an ideal world, they would all commit to the same reforms and changes to all kids and keep them safe.”

Meta and YouTube were already found negligent in March in a social media addiction trial in Los Angeles. The plaintiff, a young woman, said she became addicted to the platforms as a child and that their design contributed to body dysmorphia, depression and suicidal thoughts.

 

Also read: ChatGPT can now control iMessage, potentially raising Apple privacy concerns

 

A ruling could change the product, not just the penalty

The biggest impact of the Meta case may not be the amount of money at stake. It could be what happens to the products themselves.

If Meta is forced to change features that keep people scrolling and watching, other platforms may have to follow. Winick said companies such as Snap, which has a younger user base, could make “preemptive changes” to align with any measures imposed on Meta.

“It’s unlikely that this will permanently kill the industry, but it will significantly reduce usage over the long term as young users fail to be introduced to the platforms,” she said.

For Meta, however, the longer-term risk could be even broader.

“The real existential threat to Meta and social media as an industry is if similar lawsuits follow from adults alleging the same problems and effects,” Winick said.

That would move the debate beyond children and into a question the entire industry would have to answer: how much of social media’s design can remain unchanged if the features that keep users engaged are also found to cause harm?