Mark Zuckerberg is trying to wiggle out of testifying in person at a slew of social media trials
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is seeking to testify via videotaped deposition in multiple social media addiction lawsuits, rather than appearing in person at each trial. Plaintiffs argue that Zuckerberg should be treated like any other witness and face cross-examination in court to ensure accountability. The decision rests with US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who is expected to rule soon on whether to allow Meta's request.
- ▪Meta is facing over 2,400 lawsuits consolidated into federal multidistrict litigation over social media's impact on teen mental health.
- ▪Plaintiffs oppose Meta's request, arguing that allowing only one in-person testimony would unfairly protect Zuckerberg while harming their cases.
- ▪Zuckerberg previously testified in person in a Los Angeles case but appeared via video in a New Mexico trial where Meta was fined $375 million.
- ▪A Meta spokesperson claimed repeated in-person testimony would be duplicative given prior depositions by executives.
- ▪Legal experts note that live CEO testimony is considered the 'gold standard' in civil cases due to its impact on juries.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Business exclusive Mark Zuckerberg is trying to wiggle out of testifying in person at a slew of social media trials By Thomas Barrabi Published May 4, 2026, 6:00 a.m. ET Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is attempting to wiggle out of testifying in person at a wave of headline-grabbing trials on social media addiction this year — and plaintiffs are crying foul, The Post has learned. The Instagram parent is headed to Calif. federal court this summer as part of federal multidistrict litigation – a bid to streamline more than 2,400 lawsuits filed by school districts, state attorneys general and individuals into a few “bellwether” cases. The first, filed by Breathitt County School District in Kentucky, heads to trial on June 12.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at New York Post.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from New York Post
