Meta Youth Harms Trial & Evidence Matrix

Landmark Adolescent Addiction & Product Liability Analysis (Restatement § 2(b) vs. CDA § 230)

REUTERS DOCKET: STATE & MULTI-DISTRICT YOUTH LITIGATION
1. Cause of Action Theory Strict Liability § 2(b)

2. Alleged Algorithmic Defect Mechanisms Select Active Features
3. Target Adolescent Symptom Cohorts
Circadian / Severe Sleep Loss Clinical Depression Trajectory Adolescent Anxiety Escalation Body Dysmorphia / Disordered Eating Self-Harm Ideation

⚖️ Plaintiff Contentions

    🛡️ Defense Contentions

      Statutory & Burden Analytics Burden Score: 0.78
      Evidentiary Burden Index (Plaintiff Causation) 78%
      CDA Section 230 Preemption Vulnerability (Defense Shield) 24%

      Low CDA preemption risk: Non-speech structural design defect outside 230(c)(1) protections.

      Doctrine: Restatement (Third) of Torts § 2(b)
      Requires proof that foreseeable risks of harm could have been reduced or avoided by adoption of a reasonable alternative design (e.g. chronological feed, mandatory sleep-time killswitch).
      Relevant Case: Lemmon v. Snap, Inc., 995 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2021)
      Internal Company Notice & Research Record
      Internal teen research slide deck: "32% of teen girls said that when they felt bad about their bodies, Instagram made them feel worse."
      Evidentiary Exhibit: Bates PLTF-META-004921
      Enjoy this tool? Build your own with Super