Down Angle Symbol A symbol in the form of an angle pointing downwards. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies during Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images
- Mark Zuckerberg is trying to avoid personal liability in lawsuits over children's social media addiction.
- Corporate law generally protects executives from personal liability, but there are exceptions.
- If Zuckerberg is personally excluded from the lawsuits, the case against Meta would not be dismissed.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg argues that he cannot be held personally liable for allegations that his platforms have caused children to become addicted to social media – and he may be right.
Zuckerberg's legal team was in court this week in Oakland, California, in a series of lawsuits filed by parents and schools against Meta and him personally, alleging that his and Meta's actions harmed children through social media caused addiction, NBC Bay Area reported.
Zuckerberg has requested that he be personally excluded from the two dozen lawsuits filed by people in over a dozen states. A ruling in the billionaire's favor would relieve him of personal liability, but would not dismiss the lawsuits against Meta.
The lawsuits allege that Zuckerberg's actions and inaction led to an addiction to social media and accuse him of ignoring warnings that Facebook and Instagram were unsafe for children.
In court documents seen by Business Insider, Zuckerberg's lawyers said: “It is a fundamental principle that individuals cannot be held personally liable for the acts or omissions of a company solely because of their status as officers, directors or shareholders.”
His lawyers reiterated their arguments in court on Friday, saying there is a clear difference between Zuckerberg's personal liability as an individual and his role as CEO, NBC Bay Area reported.
Zuckerberg's lawyers did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent by Business Insider.
Under corporate law, executives are typically protected from personal liability, Bloomberg noted on Friday.
The “corporate veil” — which generally refers to the distinction between a company and its owners — protects executives in most cases, although there are exceptions, according to an article by law firm Oberheiden PC
Situations in which managers may be held liable include, but are not limited to, criminal acts and intentional or grossly negligent non-compliance. They can also be held liable in third-party lawsuits against a CEO, Oberheiden PC wrote, noting: “In these lawsuits, plaintiffs seek not to hold CEOs liable for corporate actions (or alleged corporate actions), but rather for actions taken by them CEOs in their individual roles.”
In other words, when a civil lawsuit is filed against a CEO for an action they personally took.
The plaintiffs argued in court that Zuckerberg had a duty to publicly share findings about social media risks to children, but U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers appeared skeptical of that argument, Bloomberg reported.
However, the outlet reported that the judge suggested that the CEO could potentially be held liable for concealing this information if Meta was found to have a duty to disclose this information.
“If Mark Zuckerberg knew the depth and breadth of harm children are being harmed every day by access to and dependence on the platforms he oversees, and had not taken meaningful and meaningful action to repair that harm, then he should be arrested. “Personally liable,” Titania Jordan of Bark Technologies, an online security and parental control company, told NBC Bay Area.
She added: “Now if he can make plausible deniability, or if he was made aware of it and instructed his team to do it better or safer and didn't do that, then that is the company's responsibility.”
If Zuckerberg is found personally liable, it could have significant implications for other lawsuits filed against CEOs of social media giants.