A former Meta engineering director testified in a US federal court on 20 August that Instagram knowingly adopted a 'don't ask, don't tell' policy toward users under the age of 13, placing user growth and engagement metrics above child safety. The testimony, delivered by Arturo Bejar on his second day on the stand, forms a central plank of a multistate lawsuit that accuses Meta of fuelling a youth mental health crisis.

What Bejar Told the Court

Arturo Bejar, who has previously testified before the US Congress on child safety, told the court that Meta measured employee performance and compensation primarily through engagement metrics — user numbers and time spent on the platform. 'In that context, safety was an afterthought,' he said, according to reports from the proceedings.

Bejar testified that his own research identified 'tens of thousands' of children under 13 actively using Instagram, and that it was 'common knowledge' within the company that underage users were on the platform. Despite this, he said, Meta had no 'goals or metrics' requiring employees to detect or verify the ages of suspected underage users — even as it maintained sophisticated systems to identify fake accounts.

The Multistate Lawsuit Against Meta

The trial pits Meta against the states of California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey, which are among 29 states that filed suit against the tech giant in 2023. The states allege that Meta knowingly designed features to encourage children to become addicted to its platforms, thereby contributing to a widening youth mental health crisis.

The lawsuit also reportedly alleges that Meta routinely collected data from children under 13 without parental consent, in potential violation of federal law. Meta has denied the allegations. Meta lawyer Paul Schmidt told the court: 'You will hear over the course of this case a lot of important issues, issues like teen mental health, issues like social media, issues like how teens use social media. Those are important issues, and they're issues where Meta believes that it has a responsibility.'

Safety Features That 'Were Designed to Fail'

Bejar also challenged the effectiveness of safety tools Instagram introduced for younger users. He singled out the platform's Take a Break feature, launched in 2021, arguing it was structurally ineffective because users had to manually enable it and could dismiss prompts with a single finger tap.

'A safety tool has to be on by default,' Bejar said, adding that if Meta genuinely wanted users to pause their sessions, the feature could not be so easily bypassed. Critics argue that opt-in safety designs are a recurring pattern across major social platforms, prioritising frictionless engagement over meaningful protection.

Broader Context and What Comes Next

The case is being closely watched as one of the most significant legal challenges to a major social media platform over child safety in the United States. This comes amid growing regulatory pressure globally — including the Children's Online Safety Act debates in the US and similar legislative pushes in the UK and Australia — to hold platforms accountable for the wellbeing of minors.

With the trial now under way and witness testimony under oath, the proceedings could set a precedent for how platforms design and disclose safety mechanisms for underage users. Meta has indicated it will present its own evidence of safety commitments as the case progresses.